Literature Review: Commitment
I have sectioned my literature Review into seven sections; Ontology, Coordination or Style, Our Role as Disclosers, Commitment, Breakdown, Disclosing New Technologies, Designing Disclosure.Have a look at my problem statement here.
We are the way we are because occurrences have led us to make a commitment to some cause, person, or role with an intensity that we cannot establish in any shared terms. These two different accounts of identity seem radically opposed. One says that our sense of identity depends on others and the other says that it depends solely on the intensity of our individual commitment(Flores, Spinosa, & Dreyfus, 1998).
For Heidegger, we always remain subject to the public norms of intelligibility. It is the public view or they that we are trying to change through our commitment. Consequently, the public view can change in such a way as to make our commitment irrelevant. It is this possibility that we are always sensitive to which enables us to position ourselves.
What we call our identity is split into two different functions: we see ourselves through the eyes of others, and determine which actions position us in the way that gives us the most credibility – while also interpreting which actions make the best sense of our commitment.
Our positioning operates only on the basis of our commitment, so it can only cause us to give up our commitment if it has become entirely irrelevant or hopeless.
Communication is not a process of transmitting information and symbols, but one of commitment and interpretation (Winograd & Flores, 1987). We have to interpret what to do to manifest the commitment truly. Since, we are always also trying to make our commitment make sense to others and ourselves, we must manage the way we position our actions.Our sense of being over committed is precisely how we today experience the risk of living in the recognition of others(Flores, Spinosa, & Dreyfus, 1998).