How one may not communicate: A reply to Andersen

This article replies to Andersen's article. Both deal in part with the compatibility of the axiom that one cannot not communicate and certain common assumptions about communication. Both articles are concerned with identifying minimal necessary conditions for communication. Both discuss symbolic behavior, interaction, encoding, and fidelity. Motley and Andersen disagree on the meanings of these concepts, as well as on their role in establishing minimal necessary conditions for communication. Motley notes that both Andersen's perspective and popular versions of the axiom encourage equating communication with perception. He then demonstrates that common postulates contradict the notion that all perception is communication. The postulates suggest that there are situations in which only noncommunicative source behaviors occur, so one can indeed not communicate.