•  
  •  
 

Abstract

Students of communication and related studies (journalism, media studies, development communication, etc.) study a plethora of theories coming from various social science disciplines for their slight or extensive reference to communication. One common observation among students of these theories is their seeming disconnect and lack of relationship with one another. This observation that communication is not yet a coherent field is proof of the fact that communication lacks a metatheory. Constructing communication’s metatheory, also known as metanarrative or grand theory, however, though welcome, runs contrary to post-structuralism, today’s celebrated philosophical rage that frowns on such metatheory formulations. Thus, in the context of the current philosophical milieu, communication's metatheory ends up being constructed and deconstructed at the same time. This paper analyzes the issue of unifying communication theories as the answer to the lack of coherence of communication studies. It holds that metatheory development may not necessarily make communication coherent as it did other disciplines. Communication is shaping up to be a discipline defined by the philosophical theses of post-structuralism, which frowns on metatheory formulation and sees in discourse the validity of post-structuralist studies. Communication as a metadiscourse can explore the discourses in Philippine society and help enrich them.

Download

Share

COinS