Dialogue ain’t for Sissies!

Discussion in 'General Philosophy' started by coberst, Apr 25, 2008.

  1. coberst Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    949
    Dialogue ain’t for Sissies!

    Human discourse seldom goes beyond adolescent styled discussion, debate, or argument. Intellectually, judging by our discourse, few Americans have the sophistication to undertake dialogue. I am 74 years old and have never experienced dialogue either as a participant or as a spectator. Our discourse seldom takes us beyond tacit (only a vague feeling) knowledge.

    I am convinced that until we can dialogue we will never be safe from self destruction and perhaps even destruction of the planet for any life forms.

    Few Americans are prepared to dialogue. Dialogue is much different from discussion and debate. To dialogue requires much preparation and our educational system have not prepared us for the practice of dialogue.

    Our educational system is almost completely dedicated to rote teaching. Our system is almost totally a system of teaching by telling. Why is this so?

    A didactic technique of educating young people is the most efficient way of inculcating facts into the memory of children. It seems to me that it is necessary to teach facts to children as quickly and as efficiently as possible during their early years.

    It is vital that we have knowledge of many and varied types of algorithms. The more our lives are controlled by technology the more algorithms we must know.

    However, there are no known algorithms for many problems that we face daily. Where we fail to have algorithms we must find ways to facilitate understanding.

    How does the Socratic technique, or as it is more often called the dialogue method, enhance understanding by a student?

    A classroom that is focusing on a dialogue technique of instruction would be one wherein there would be the usual teacher and a number of pupils. A question or a matter of interest would be introduced and pupils would be asked to give their opinion on the matter. Each student voicing a point of view would be subject to questions by members of the class and the instructor and each would be expect to defend the opinion as best they can. Such a class program would require, in many cases that the students come to class well prepared and ready to become an active participant.

    The subject might be the American war in Iraq, for example. One can imagine in such a case that there would be many different points of view. Some students might be from homes wherein varying political affiliations might be held. Some students may be Muslims or Jews of Protestants. Such a question would elicit many and strongly held views. The views of all students would be subjected to questions focusing upon the quality of the argument supporting a view and perhaps questions that might focus upon the biases exposed by the view. Assumptions would be examined and questioned. The whole process is directed toward establishing a critical habit of thought in all students.

    How does a young person who has finished their schooling develop their own value system?

    How does a young person develop a sound intellectual foundation upon which to build a life?

    What is a sound intellectual foundation?

    How does a young person learn to ask the important questions?
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. visceral_instinct Monkey see, monkey denigrate Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,913
    Why do you use 'adolescent' as an insult?
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. coberst Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    949
    Why do you think that?
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. gendanken Ruler of All the Lands Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,779
    By shaming him into submission.
     
  8. Captain Kremmen All aboard, me Hearties! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,738
    This is not dialogue, it is discussion, used in every schoolroom in the world.
     
  9. coberst Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    949
    Dialogue is a technique for mutual consideration of such problems wherein solutions grow in a dialectical manner. Through dialogue each individual brings his/her point of view to the fore by proposing solutions constructed around their specific view. All participants in the dialogue come at the solution from the logic of their views. The solution builds dialectically i.e. a thesis is developed and from this thesis and a contrasting antithesis is constructed a synthesis that takes into consideration both proposals. From this a new synthesis, a new thesis is developed.

    When we are dealing with monological problems well circumscribed by algorithms the personal biases of the subject are of small concern. In multilogical problems, without the advantage of paradigms and algorithms, the biases of the problem solvers become a serious source of error. One important task of dialogue is to illuminate these prejudices which may be quite subtle and often out of consciousness of the participant holding them.

    When we engage in a dialogue what happens? The first thing we find is that dialogue is unlike anything in which we have previously been involved. Group discussions generally digress quickly into verbal food fights and nothing positive is accomplished. Discussions become venues for shouting at one another. The most important thing discovered--provided you wished to advance your thinking so as to develop a means for solving intractable problems--is that skills and attitudes not presently possessed must be developed.

    In a dialogue one discovers that advancement of the group toward solutions requires that each member be part of a coherent body wherein all agree to certain standards and procedures. It is necessary to form a solid foundation for the house under construction. The foundation must be solid and the structure true to a standard. In a house construction one sees carpenters using plumb-bobs and levels constantly. What are the plumb-bobs and levels of thought? What are the standards and principles of successful dialogue?

    Each member of the dialogue discovers that things never thought of before are the first matters that must be resolved. The science of thought is the first and fundamental consideration that dawn on the participants. What are the fundaments of thought that must be examined?

    The science of epistemology imposes itself immediately as a first consideration. Epistemology is the theory and craft of knowing. If the members of the group cannot agree on what knowledge is that group can go no further.

    What can the group agree upon as to what is knowledge and what is truth? For all those who have never given such matters any thought this sounds a bit silly. Everyone knows what knowledge is and what truth is. That is a problem. Those never engaged in dialogue are likely to have ever questioned such basic concerns. This whole matter of introducing the concept of dialogue faces the bootstrap problem. The bootstrap problem is one of accomplishing an end when the end to be accomplished is necessary for considering the end to be accomplished. Can the dog ever catch its tail?

    Only after the group agrees on the nature of the plum bobs and levels of thought will the group be ready to move to the next step. The next barrier that it is likely to face is of the distinction between awareness and consciousness.

    Before Americans can dialogue there must be preparation. That preparation is not furnished by our educational system. The only way that Americans can prepare themselves for dialogue is through a process of self-actualizing self-learning. It is here that we must begin our effort to dialog.

    A dialogical process is not one wherein individuals reason together in an attempt to make common, ideas that are already known to each individual. ”Rather, it may be said that the two people are making something in common, i.e., creating something new together.” Dialogical reasoning together is an act of creation, of mutual understanding, of meaning.

    Dialogic can happen only if both individuals wish to reason together in truth, in coherence, without prejudice, and without trying to influence each other.
    Each must be prepared to “drop his old ideas and intentions. And be ready to go on to something different, when this is called for…Thus, if people are to cooperate (i.e., literally to ‘work together’) they have to be able to create something in common, something that takes shape in their mutual discussions and actions, rather than something that is conveyed from one person who acts as an authority to the others, who act as passive instruments of this authority.”

    “On Dialogue” written by “The late David Bohm, one of the greatest physicists and foremost thinkers this century, was Fellow of the Royal Society and Emeritus Professor of Physics at Birkbeck College, University of London.

    Bohm is convinced that communication is breaking down as a result of the crude and insensitive manner in which it is transpiring. Communication is a concept with a common meaning that does not fit well with the concepts of dialogue, dialectic, and dialogic.

    I claim that if we citizens do not learn to dialogue we cannot learn to live together in harmony sufficient to save the species.
     
  10. Malakas Banned Banned

    Messages:
    273
    Survival of the fittest...all the way old man.
     
  11. Spud Emperor solanaceous common tater Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,899
    Live your life as forest..die a log.
     
  12. cosmictraveler Be kind to yourself always. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    33,264
    How does a young person who has finished their schooling develop their own value system?


    By learning it from their parents who should teach them. Also their friends can be good role models if they are really true friends.


    How does a young person develop a sound intellectual foundation upon which to build a life?


    By listening to their parents , teachers and peers.


    What is a sound intellectual foundation?


    By attending school as long and as far as possible.


    How does a young person learn to ask the important questions?


    By listening to others that ask questions will give them insight as to do the same. Also good communication with their parents will be of great value.
     
  13. coberst Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    949
    cosmic...

    I would disagree with your answers. I think that a young person should, when his or her schooling is complete, start a hobby as a self-actualizing self-learner. After schooling is over it is time to examine the values and knowledge that we have grown up with and to remodel them in accordance to what we discover about our self and about our world through the self-learning process.
     
  14. Captain Kremmen All aboard, me Hearties! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,738
    Many of the aspects you see as unique to dialogue would be present in a good discussion also.

    For example, a willingness to learn and change one's mind, avoidance of dogma and assumptions, questioning of faulty logic, listening to the other person's point of view etc.
     
  15. Gustav Banned Banned

    Messages:
    12,575
    excellent
    bogged down in semantics

    a dialogue is is structured. there are formalities tho less strenuous than those of a debate.
    then we have a discussion. a term that is almost always qualified.

     
  16. Gustav Banned Banned

    Messages:
    12,575

    /slaps with a dead fish
     
  17. Captain Kremmen All aboard, me Hearties! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,738
    It's the structure behind dialogue which makes me distrustful of it.
    In Socrates arguments, he always knows the endpoint of the discussion before it begins. The purpose of the argument is not to make people think, but to make people think the same as Socrates.
     
  18. Gustav Banned Banned

    Messages:
    12,575
    ah, like my endgame

    so what
    what if he is right?
    can a myriad of viewpoints all be valid?
    can we weigh them?
    give preference to the argument that is the least fallacious?
    while discarding and ridiculing the rest?

    i think i think so
     
  19. Captain Kremmen All aboard, me Hearties! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,738
    Coberst where art thou?
    (Some dialogue this is)
     
    Last edited: Apr 28, 2008
  20. Malakas Banned Banned

    Messages:
    273
    Lord of flies, are you ever going to dare engage me?

    Imbecile, you've had too much free reign...it is time for you to taste reality.
    No more eating of piles of crap, you stupid fuck, time to face the grim reaper.

    Please post a pic of me (or what you think is me), - that you found on-line -
    you imbecile retarded fuck, and I'll promise to tear you a new a-hole.

    I loved your feminine tactics. So indicative of your true nature, you retarded bug.
    And please impress me with your /style
    And stupid verbal acrobatics *joinks*

    I, and only you, perhaps, know of your real true value, don't we, you stupid fucK?
     
  21. Gustav Banned Banned

    Messages:
    12,575
    /rotfl
     
  22. Gustav Banned Banned

    Messages:
    12,575
    but, but
    i had no idea!

    /rotfc
     
  23. Malakas Banned Banned

    Messages:
    273

Share This Page