The concern of a dialogue is not to win an argument but to forge a greater understanding of the matter being discussed. Aristotle described and classified 4 types of arguments didactic, dialectical, examination arguments and contentious arguments. It wasn’t until recently and Waltron’s research which modernized the thoughts behind dialogues (1998).
Types of dialogue
|TYPE||INITIAL SITUATION||MAIN GOAL||PARTICIPANTS AIM|
|Persuasion dialogue||Conflicting points of view||Resolution such problems by verbal means||Persuade the other(s) in the dialogue|
|Negotiation||Conflict of interests and need for more cooperation||Making a deal||Get the best out of it for oneself|
|Inquiry||General ignorance||Growth of knowledge and agreement||Find a proof or destroy one|
|Deliberation||Need for action||Reach a decision||Influence outcome|
|Information seeking||Personal ignorance||Spreading knowledge and revealing postions||Gain, pass on, show or hide personal knowledge|
|Eristics||Conflict and antagonism||Reaching a, provisional, accommodation in a relationship||Strike the other party and win in the eyes of onlookers.|
The system used in the community will usually be an inquiry, persuasion or information seeking dialogue. To make it easier to tell when a dialogue has started key phrases might be worthwhile idea like “So we are discussing X now correct?” I need more research into dialogues before I write more entries.
[note: Dialogues are a form of discussion, not necessarily a debate, they were used as a teaching and reasoning method for thousands of years before falling out of vogue in recent times. The idea of discussing a principle with structured debate not just speaking louder or interrupting is a sorely required skill in the modern era. Remaining calm, noting logical fallacies in other arguments and our own is fundamental. It is especially useful in a community that actively seeks to improve itself, and where everyone should be able to voice an opinion.]