Although many of these developments are highly questionable, they show at least the structural moves and fissures that characterize the current changes. And as such – especially with all their contradictions – they are hugely relevant in providing the background against which communication has to be seen. We thus arrive at the point of communicating knowledge –generally, knowledge is understood to be comprised of skills, understanding and adjunct values. In brief, we may say that it is following a similar pattern of development as outlined with the bol’shie tsiklys – the following graph proposes a cycle which we can take as communication cycle: Interesting is not only the change of relevant actors and ‘media’ – from the general to the concrete – but also the fact that the mode of communication, understood as linking to ‘applicability’ and daily life, is changing in the same vein.
In a nutshell, we return to the social quality approach, which is concerned with people’s interrelated productive and reproductive relationships. Social quality is an approach that is in a twofold way de-socialized: the different arrays of society stand, in a somewhat isolated manner, side by side as pillars. In some respect, we may speak of non-communicating vessels – based on a zero-sum assumption – and consider the status quo, dominated by neo-liberal economic thinking and practice. The problems are obvious: sub-systemic functionality may be enhanced; however, systemic functionality is diminished or even completely undermined.
Furthermore, dysfunctions may be temporarily or partly or regionally overcome by exchanges between the pillars.