Dialogue Democracy Morality

It is widely accepted that the machinery of multicultural societies and liberal democratic systems is dependent upon various forms of dialogue - dialogue between political parties, between different social groups, between the ruling and the ruled. But what are the conditions of a democratic dialogue and how does the philosophical dialogic approach apply to practice? Recently, facing challenges from mass protest movements across the globe, liberal democracy has found itself in urgent need of a solution to the problem of translating mass activity into dialogue, as well as that of designing borders of dialogue. Exploring the multifaceted nature of the concepts of dialogue and democracy, and critically examining materializations of dialogue in social life, this book offers a variety of perspectives on the theoretical and empirical interface between democracy and dialogue. Bringing together the latest work from scholars across Europe, Democracy in Dialogue, Dialogue in Democracy offers fresh theorizations of the role of dialogue in democratic thought and practice and will appeal to scholars of sociology, political science and social and political theory.

To Strive, To Seek, To Find explains how an avowedly ethical practice of public dialogue and deliberation can counteract the growing discontent with liberalism and the threat it poses to democratic beliefs, attitudes, and behaviors. The book describes the form dialogue and deliberation must take. It concludes with an appeal to our felt need to restore a sense of purpose to our life in common. Political conflict in the U.S. has been growing increasingly adversarial and intractable. Opponents agree on almost nothing, not even the most rudimentary facts. People have sorted themselves into ideological "tribes" whose worldviews are increasingly at odds. Support for democratic ideals and principles, such as tolerance and compromise, are weakening. Much of the public is angry and resentful. Clearly, liberal democracy is under growing stress. It is threatened not from without, but from within - by the very ideas and practices for which it has long been celebrated. Although liberalism in the modern era has improved life greatly for many people (and continues to do so), it is dogged by a nagging question: "Is this all there is?" Despite the benefits it has bestowed, such as material prosperity, it "has left a hunger for shared public conceptions about the purpose of life." A democratic society's way of life is the public expression of an ethical ideal that offers a provisional and evolving answer to this question. Liberalism celebrates a plurality of approaches to life, but it does nothing to encourage reflection on the desirability and acceptability of those approaches. Its highly individualistic, "laissez-faire" approach to ethics - which almost all of us, from social democrats to libertarians, take for granted - provides little support for our efforts, as individuals and as a society, to reflect on and pursue a meaningful life. Because it treats value (goodness) as a function of personal desire and treats freedom (especially in the guise of rights) as the panacea for all conflicts, liberalism turns the political arena into a kind of market in which groups and individuals compete with each other to determine "who gets what, when, and how." It offers no rational way of securing agreement concerning the ethical dilemmas underlying many of the political issues that divide us. This disables and discourages us from deliberating together. As a result, power becomes the only political currency that matters, and liberalism ends up sending the message that we may use any means necessary to achieve our self-chosen ends. Human beings require a persuasive and animating vision of human place and purpose in the great scheme of things. Constructing meaning and purpose requires an ongoing practice of public dialogue and deliberation that helps us ask and answer (even if indirectly) the fundamental question of ethics: "How should we live?" To Strive, To Seek, To Find explains why we must turn to ethical dialogue and deliberation to restore meaning to our lives in the face of liberalism's failure to support our efforts to explore, generate, and evaluate answers to the questions of human purpose and how we ought to live. It shows how we can do this, and how in the process we can repair our strained civic relationships by resolving, or at least mitigating, the fraught issues that divide us.

This collection brings into dialogue authors from a range of disciplines and perspectives to address the thorny question of how to balance the demands of «democratic dialogue» with the reality of a world in which each voice does not carry equal weight. Should rules be in place, for example, that correct for such imbalances by privileging some voices or muting others? Should separate spaces be created for traditionally disadvantaged groups to speak only among themselves? Is democratic dialogue in an inclusive sense even a possibility in a world divided by multiple dimensions of power and privilege? Leading theorists from several countries share a concern for social justice and present radically different interpretations of what democracy means for educational practice. In a format unusual for such collections, the essays speak directly to each other about significant moral, philosophical, and practical differences regarding how to effectively engage students as critical participants in classrooms fraught with power and difference. The authors draw from philosophy, critical race theory, sociology, feminist, and poststructural studies to address topics including hate speech, freedom of expression, speech codes, the meanings of silence, conceptions of voice and agency, and «political correctness». They explore honestly and self-critically the troubling and disturbing dimensions of speech and silence that situate the classroom as a volatile microcosm of contemporary political contradictions.

People around the world are agitating for democracy and individual rights, but there is no consensus on a theory of liberal democracy that might guide them. What are the first principles of a just society? What political theory should shape public policy in such a society? In this book, James S. Fishkin offers a new basis for answering these questions by proposing the ideal of a "self-reflective society" - a political culture in which citizens are able to decide their own fate through unconstrained dialogue. Fishkin offers a comprehensive critique of liberal political theories that do not satisfy the requirements for a self-reflective society. He then explains his own theory of liberalism, showing that the freely self-examining society he advocates can provide the key to issues of political legitimacy and social justice. Fishkin proposes practical applications of his theory that would lead to more participatory democracy. Among these are deliberative opinion polls that would allow ordinary citizens to explore issues directly with candidates before elections, and vouchers that would allow them to organize representation for their interests. Fishkin examines a broad range of topics from the fresh perspective of a self-reflective society: utility and its limits, justice between generations, conflicting ideals of democracy, equal opportunity, the connections between theory and public policy, the notion of moral progress, and the bases for political obligation. His book makes a new contribution to central debates in moral, political, and legal philosophy.

Concerns about the role and responsibilities of the media have become an increasingly important part of public debate. Media Ethics brings together philosophers, academics and media professionals to debate both ethics and morality.