Challengerand the social contingency of meaning: Two lessons for the technical communication classroom
- 1 June 1992
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Taylor & Francis in Technical Communication Quarterly
- Vol. 1 (3) , 73-86
- https://doi.org/10.1080/10572259209359507
Abstract
In my technical writing class, I examine two “meanings” from the Challenger disaster to illustrate the social contingency of meaning even in science and technology. These instances are the “anomalous” charring of the O‐rings and the reconceptualized assumption of flightworthiness the night before the launch. The social contingency of these meanings shows that the “object” of technical communication is not the material object as a pre‐existent isolate but in its social interpretation, significance, and meaning. Ultimately, technical communication is about people communicating about and to the interests of other people.Keywords
This publication has 9 references indexed in Scilit:
- The lessons of the Challenger investigationsIEEE Transactions on Dependable and Secure Computing, 1991
- The Construction of Knowledge in Organizations: Asking the Right Questions about the ChallengerJournal of Business and Technical Communication, 1990
- The Discourse Community in Scientific and Technical Communication: Institutional and Social ViewsJournal of Technical Writing and Communication, 1989
- Technical Communication, Group Differentiation, and the Decision to Launch the Space Shuttle ChallengerJournal of Technical Writing and Communication, 1988
- Communication failures contributing to the Challenger accident: an example for technical communicatorsIEEE Transactions on Dependable and Secure Computing, 1988
- Invention as a Social ActCollege Composition and Communication, 1987
- A Humanistic Rationale for Technical WritingCollege English, 1979
- Eloquence in a technological societyCentral States Speech Journal, 1978
- Language as Symbolic ActionPublished by University of California Press ,1966