Chapter 5

Dialogic ethics is defined as the “pragmatically necessary in a time which multiple communication ethics identify this historical moment. Our time lives with differing narrative and virtue structures, placing any communication ethics theory within the realm of limits and temporality, unable to offer guidance for decision making in all places and for all time” (Arnett, Fritz & Bell, 2009, pg. 79). Dialogic ethics uses an approachable way to communicate that allows differing ethical backgrounds to compare and contrast the sense of the “good” that is being communicated with to one another. In particular, dialogic ethics emerged with the term dialogic civility, that includes is a safe place for engaging difference when such a place is not present. Dialogic civility is especially important when some settings offer minimal common ground and communicators are required to remain civilized to continue the conversation.           

            Throughout the chapter the author provides a dialogic model of communication that begins with four questions. To start, (1) what does it mean to “show up?” (2) what is the communication ethics position from which I work, and how does it inform my interaction? (3) how can I offer the Other opportunity to articulate the position or ground that shapes a communication ethic? (4) how can communication work as a learning model based upon self- reflective accountability? The dialogic model of communication provides a person with ability to recognize how to interact in different situations. This is important because from day to day conversations with strangers or close friends, allowing the other to respect different narratives, cultures and contexts.

For example, over the past weekend I went out with a few friends for drinks at a local bar downtown. As soon as I got to the restaurant a stranger who was very interested in vocalizing his political views approached me. His political views were  irrelevant, it was important that I remain ethical throughout the conversation. Firstly, I had to remain present in the conversation and realize that not everyone has the same narrative ground or historical background. Secondly, conversing and following up with actions that were different with his viewpoint were necessary if I had to remain in the conversation that I wasn’t interested in. Thirdly, remaining civil was the only common ground that permitted the continuing of the conversation. How do I reconnect word and deed? How can I incorporate my opinion and word and later follow up with particular deeds? However, this step was the least relevant with the context of situation and setting. The third step in the dialogic model was the most difficult. How can I remain civil and respectful in this particular situation when I disagree with everything this stranger is saying? I had to remain ethical. Lastly, the fourth step in the model emphasizes the importance of attending to the Other, and continuing to learn throughout different conversations. The dialogic model provides a beneficial guideline to help people remain ethical when communicating with others.