With the project of modernity, which was accepted as a project initiated in the first half of the twentieth century and is still widely debated, the world is being reshaped with a rational understanding that leads to dogmatism, and when the idea that progress will lead to the better turns out to be a delusion, we encounter postmodernist imperatives that have been put into circulation strongly since the second half of the twentieth century. These imperatives, with their uncertain, fluid, slippery, pluralistic, simulative and ironic aspects, also take away the last support on which the subject leans its existence and begin to melt all oppositions into each other. Consequently, the parole that directly indicates the existence of the subject, including other language acts, becomes worthless under the occupation of the same imperatives and loses its qualities of containing the truth, in other words, pointing to what is beyond, and being multiplying and creative. In his important work The Humiliation of the Word, published in 1981, Jacques Ellul, as is known, deeply examines the aforementioned decrease and the loss of value, humiliation and displacement that this state includes with a theo-ontological interpretation, while emphasizing that the real issue is that images -similar to imperative reason- can only be equated with a clear, unambiguous and beyond-less composition. Thus, when losing the parole occupies the sole existence of the self with a purely clear, unambiguous and beyond-less reality, the subject is, so to speak, exiled from possible dimensions of truth that are far beyond the truth. Consequently, the dialogue that we expect to be established through the common language acts of two different subjects will also be damaged by the two subjects who have lost their unique selves being thrown into the void. Now, all subjects are only interested in images; the clear, unambiguous concreteness that they can see, and their language and self are increasingly crushed under this occupation of images, solving the truth from within. Starting from this striking issue that we can relate to both language and therefore ontology and that still speaks strongly to us, we first tried to show the connection established with the lost parole by focusing on the newspaper text in which the news was directly published, a remarkable attack on Michelangelo’s Pieta in the Vatican in 1972, a date and geography very close to The Humiliation of the Word, under the title “The Fall of Truth: ‘What Gives Place to the Parole?’”. Then, we went on to examine the illusion of freedom created by the postmodern age that opened up with the fall of the parole, which seems to have opened up a universe of multi-options and infinite acts to the subject, and under the title “The Lure of Uncertainty: An Illusion of Freedom”, we tried to answer another issue that renders dialogues null and void: whether freedom exists in the postmodern age. For this, we discussed the “Cambridge Analytica Scandal” in the literature and to what extent social media users -who have become image-creators in the twenty-first century according to the context of our study- can be included in the “user consent” and as a result of the statistical data we applied, we came to the conclusion that the appearance of image-creator subjects on their own social media tools is a much more dominant force than their freedom to create, which is essentially destroyed.

In the continuation, we opened the title “Bilateral Intimacy: Where Should We Place the Parole?” and first, starting from a movie scene, we exemplified how subjects can turn into billboards while conducting their dialogues, thus putting the word into circulation and consumption. Finally, we tried to place and base all our interpretations and inferences on the parole, again in the uncertain area created by postmodernist imperatives, on the concept of double privacy as a proposal or a subject of discussion. Considering that the privacy of the subject, who is now held responsible for his own actions as the image-creator of the twenty-first century, has also been invaded, we presented proposals regarding the possibility of establishing not a concrete privacy area, but a privacy area that can be created infinitely only with the parole itself, including the truth, which was added as a new sixth to Paul Riceour’s five-fold discourse dialectic.

At the final point we have reached, we hope that we have been able to show how the parole, as a marker of existence, and its dramatic loss still have great importance even when it marks a topic of discussion, and that the concept we propose can be diversified and discussed in this context.