Cover not available
Part of
Dialogic Ethics
Edited by Ronald C. Arnett and François Cooren
[Dialogue Studies 30] 2018
► pp. 127–148

Differing versions of dialogic aptitude

Bakhtin, Dewey and Habermas

Discussing dialogical ethics implies that people have the aptitude to participate in dialogue. We also surmise that a dialogical ethic would co-construct meaning on moral, ethical and normative issues. Can we make sense of a dialogical ethic at all the relevant levels of our social life, which includes the interpersonal, organizational and social contexts? We need a theoretical frame that will permit circulation between these levels without demanding too much from dialogue. Bakhtin, one of the main theoreticians of dialogue, will be discussed along with Habermas and Dewey (Bakhtin 1981; Dewey 1925; Habermas 1981). To test the idea that they might also have value for guiding social practices, I discuss them while examining the typical preoccupations of water basin governance.

Keywords: dialogical ethics, dialogical aptitude, Bakhtin, Habermas, Dewey
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Network participatory governance
  • 3.Dewey’s pragmatism
  • 4.Reading Habermas with Dewey in mind
  • 5.A dialogical applied ethics
  • 6.Bakhtin’s contribution
  • 7.Discussing this theoretical ensemble in relationship with the situational case
  • 8.Conclusion
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 14 June 2018
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/ds.30.05let
References
Agrawal, Arun, and Clark C. Gibson
1999 “Enchantment and Disenchantment. The Role of Community in Natural Resource Conservation.” World Development 27 (4): 629–49. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Allen, Graham
2000 Intertextuality. London & New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Bakhtin, Mikhaïl
1981 The Dialogic Imagination: Four Essays. Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
1975 Esthétique et théorie du roman. Paris: Gallimard.Google Scholar
Barthes, Roland
1968 «  La mort de l’auteur  ». In R. Barthes, Œuvres complètes III. Paris: Seuil 1993, 40–51.Google Scholar
Bégin, Luc
2011 «  La compétence éthique en contexte professionnel  ». In L. Langlois (dir.), Le professionnalisme et l’éthique au travail, Ste Foy: Presses de l’Université Laval, 105–122.Google Scholar
Callon, Michel, Pierre Lascoumes, and Yannick Barthes
2001 Acting in an Uncertain World: An Essay on Technical Democracy. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Cooren, François
2015 Organizational Discourse: Communication and Constitution. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Dewey, John
1939 Theory of Valuation. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
1927 The Public and Its Problems. New York: Holt.Google Scholar
1925 Experience and Nature. Jo-Ann Boydston 1981 (ed.), The Later Works, 1925–1953, Volume I: 1925 Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.Google Scholar
Edgar, Andrew
2005 The Philosophy of Habermas. Montreal & Kingston: McGill-Queen’s.Google Scholar
Gadamer, Hans Georg
2011; 1960 Truth and Method. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen
1996 Between Facts and Norms: Contributions to a Discussion Theory of Law and Democracy. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
1984, 1987 The Theory of Communicative Action. V. 1 and 2, Boston: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
1990 Moral Consciousness and Communicative Action. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
2001 On the Pragmatics of Social Interaction. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Halley, Paule & Julia Sotousek
(ed.) 2012 L’environnement, notre patrimoine commun et son État gardien. Aspects juridiques nationaux, transnationaux et internationaux. Cowansville (Qc): Yvon Blais/Thomson Reuters.Google Scholar
Honneth, Axel
1996 The Struggle for Recognition. Boston: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Ingram, David
2010 Habermas: Introduction and Analysis. Ithaca & London: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Johannesen, Richard L.
1996 Ethics in Human Communication. Prospect Heights, Ill: Waveland Press (5th edition).Google Scholar
Kim, Gary
2004 “Mikhail Bakhtin: The Philosopher of Human Communication,” Totem: The University of Western Ontario Journal of Anthropology 12 (1.8): [URL]
Létourneau, Alain
2014 “An Example of the Plurality of Levels of Communication Ethics Analysis in a Newspaper Article.” In Philosophy of Communication Ethics: Alterity and the Other, ed. by Ronald C. Arnett and Pat Arneson, 233–252. Madison NJ: Fairleigh Dickinson University Press.Google Scholar
2012 “Towards an Inclusive Notion of Dialogue for Ethical and Moral Purposes.” In (Re)Presentations and Dialogue, ed. by François Cooren and Alain Létourneau, 17–36. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2010 «  Pour une éthique de l’environnement inspirée par le pragmatisme : l’exemple du développement durable  », VertigO – la revue électronique en sciences de l’environnement 10 (1) : [URL].DOI logo
2007 “A Discussion of Habermas’ Reading and Use of Toulmin’s Model of Argumentation.” In Proceedings of the Sixth Conference of the International Society for the Study of Argumentation, ed. by dans F. Van Eemeren, J. Anthony Blair, Charles A. Willard, Bart Garssen, 881–88. Amsterdam: SicSat.Google Scholar
2002 La tension qui caractérise une éthique des communications. Sherbrooke Qc: GGC.Google Scholar
1999 L’herméneutique de Maurice Blondel. Son émergence pendant la crise moderniste. Montréal Qc: Bellarmin.Google Scholar
Lewicki, Roy J., Gray, Barbara and Michael Elliot
2003 Making Sense of Intractable Environmental Conflicts. Washington, DC: Island Press.Google Scholar
Lipari, Lisbeth
2012 Listening, Thinking, Being: Towards an Ethic of Attunement. University Park: Penn State Press.Google Scholar
Misak, Cheryl
2013 The American Pragmatists. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Norton, Brian G.
2015 Sustainable Values, Sustainable Change: A Guide to Environmental Decision Making. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ostrom, Elinor
2001 “Vulnerability and Polycentric Governance Systems”, Update IHDP 3, [URL].
2005 Understanding Institutional Diversity. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Paquet, Gilles
2009 Crippling Epistemologies and Governance Failures: A Plea for Experimentalism. Ottawa: University of Ottawa Press.Google Scholar
Peirce, Charles S.
1878, “How to Make our Ideas Clear”. In Philosophical Writings of Peirce, ed. by J. Buchler, 23–41 (1955) New York: Dover.Google Scholar
1905 “The Principles of Phenomenology”. In Philosophical Writings of Peirce, ed. by J. Buchler, 74–97 (1955) New York: Dover.Google Scholar
Schön, Donald A.
1983 The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action. London: Temple Smith.Google Scholar
Volosinov, Valentin N. / Bakhtin, Mikhaïl
1973 Marxism and Philosophy of Language. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Von Wright, Georg H.
1967 “Deontic Logic”, American Philosophical Quarterly 4 (2): 136–153.Google Scholar
Weigand, Edda
2009 Language as Dialogue. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Weidner, Helmut & Martin Jänicke
(eds) 2002 Capacity Building in National Environmental Policy. Berlin: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 2 other publications

Létourneau, Alain
2019. Dialogue considered as a social ensemble of voices. Language and Dialogue 9:3 ► pp. 333 ff. DOI logo
RACINE, Eric & Abdou Simon SENGHOR
2024. Diversity in Neuroethics. In Neuroethics and Cultural Diversity, ► pp. 55 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 22 april 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.