#📓 #📚 #🟡 # Communication Ethics Literacy: Dialogue & Difference ![[calendar-plus.svg]] <small>Oct 25, 2021</small> | ![[calendar-clock.svg]] <small>Jan 03, 2023</small> 🏷️ [[ethics]] **Author:** [[Ronald C. Arnett]], Janie M. Harden Fritz, & Leeanne M. Bell McManus **Citation:** Arnett, R.C., Harden Fritz, J. M., & Bell McManus, L. M. (2017). *Communication ethics literacy: Dialogue & difference.* Kendall Hunt Publishing. --- # Summary # Notes ### Pragmatic Communication Ethics #### p. xi - We live in a time of "rival understandings of the 'good,'" so it is important that we understand and learn from difference and from the Other. Use [[postmodernity]] as marker of a time of often conflicting and competing narrative and virtue. #### p. xii - Ethics lies at the heart of communication. > we consider "ethics" as practices that enact or support a good, a central value or set of values associated with human life and conduct (p. xii). #### p. xiii - This time of differences provides the opportunity to question what was accepted as universal but did not equally serve all. Disagreement about the good disrupts what [[Hannah Arendt]] calls the life of the "[[parvenu]]". Learning from difference can be both pragmatic and liberating. #### p. xiii - [[dialogic communication ethics|Dialogic communication ethics]] begins with learning and understanding the context, topic, and persons before telling. #### p. xv - We can't assume the [[values]] we use to make [[moral judgement| judgements]] are shared by others. While judgement is an important part of ethical decision making, it can't be the first impulse. We have to start with learning. #### p. xvi - Communication ethics is context-based, so can change from moment to moment. Begins by understanding 'why' to learn about differing 'hows'. Instead of imposing ourselves on others, we have to learn from the differences we find. That learning leads to action with the understanding that negotiation of a temporal agreement is not final or permanent, but simply > a juncture taking us to the next moment of questioning or of contending goods in a time that makes communication ethics literacy necessary (p. xvii). #### p. 1 - Shift from consensus to idea of ongoing moral conversation. > The emphasis now is less on *rational agreement,* but more on sustaining those normative practices and moral relationships within which reasoned agreement *as a way of life* can flourish and continue. (Benhabib, 1992, p. 38) #### p. 3 - [[The Good]] is at the center of communication ethics. What does living a "good life" or being a "good person" look like in a time of narrative and virtue disagreement? We need to acknowledge the values of others, even if we don't agree. #### p. 5 - How we go about protecting and promoting a given good must adapt to the context of the moment. > Protection requires adaptation - a willingness to be open to new manifestations of the old and a willingness to admit when an idea's time is past and its currency has run its course. - No more, "this is the way we've always done it." #### p 6 - Communication ethics isn't about codes and principles, it's about showing up to do the work of protecting and promoting a given good. If we don't show up and reflect we lose the ability to deliberate and assess the ethical consequences. Problems we encounter, even if they are small, contribute to the formation of [[habitudes]]. So it's critical that we recognize and reflect on them. > The question is not who is and who is not ethical, but what set of ethics we and others seek to protect and promote and why (p. 8). #### p. 9 - We practice communication ethics whether we know it or not, so communication ethics literacy is pragmatic and based on three principles. 1. We won't agree with everyone on what is good. 2. All communication has an ethical dimension. 3. Commonality of ethical differences requires that we learn to read what good any particular ethic is seeking to protect and promote. #### p. 9 - [[emotivism|Emotivism]] is rampant due to inability to understand narrative practices that support a good or goods that don't align with our own personal preference. #### p. 14 - In the 21st century all communication is persuasive and value laden. We don't persuade with information or facts, but with value-laden content that frames information. People often can't say why they have a particular value beyond preference. #### p. 16 - Persuasive power of a position is result of both articulation and lived action. The good gains influence and validity through its practice in life. > it represents the way human beings attempt to engage life with the recognition that we do not always live up to this good (p. 16). #### p. 17 - We are continually shaped by the influence of others. While there is a loss of consensus, we must find temporal common centers that bring us together, because we cannot be fully self-sufficient. > A given good has temporal ground of a common center that brings people together (p.18). #### p. 18 - Postmodernity demands that we learn about our own sense of the good and difference in the beliefs and actions of others. We must understand a position for viewing the world and how that view shapes our understanding of data and facts. #### p. 25 - Four metaphors of communication ethics praxis: 1. Multiplicity of communication ethics - There are multiple ideas of [[The Good]] 2. Philosophy of communication - Important to understand why this "good" is important. 3. Applied communication - How I communicate "the good" and the why. 4. Narrative - Shared story, defined by common practices and beliefs, that shapes actions and behaviors of the group. #### p. 29 - Communicating ethically is not easy. Requires reflection, care and choice, being sensitive to historical context but not being value-neutral. Staying open to others while still standing on one's own ground. Requires continual deliberation - need to learn one's own standpoint and the standpoint of others. #### p. 29 - Communication ethics lies within the tension of competing goods. We no longer have consensus on what counts as virtuous behavior and what is good for humans to be and do. To understand and engage in communication ethics requires basic rhetorical skills: 1. discern the narrative 2. discern the goods within the given narrative that shapes the ethical 3. understand that any web of goods lives within a particular context ### Common Sense & Theories #### p. 62 - There is no one standard for what we call "[[common sense]]." Common sense is a byproduct of what we know and practice. With so much diversity, it's no longer common. Can't judge something as lacking common sense based only on what we know, as if our own experience is the universal truth. We all have different backgrounds and experiences. Common sense exists among like groups but is not universal across groups. #### p. 67 - Loss of agreed-upon common sense is opportunity for learning in a time of difference. Requires being attentive to different narratives and standpoints, each of which gives rise to a theory that attempts to offer guidance. #### p. 69 - Theory depends on a common story and standpoint, and there are multiple theories of good. Theories are a map or lens by which to see and understand - can zoom in or out. In addition to looking at something through the eyes of our own experience, we can look at it through the eyes of theory. ### Dialogic Ethics #### p. 77 - [[dialogic communication ethics|Dialogic communication ethics]] theory can provide reasons for particular actions in a given moment - that's it. There have always been differences in perspectives, but this may be the first time we've acknowledged and elevated other perspectives. #### p. 78 - Difference makes [[dialogue]] possible and dialogue opens the door to other persons and ideas. [[Paulo Freire]] reminds us of liberating importance of dialogue for learning. [[Hannah Arendt]] warns against pop view of dialogue that embraces importance of belonging to a social group. - Need to be aware of the values and goods advocated for by groups or organizations - do we really want to belong? Learning through dialogue transforms us and the other. #### p. 84 - Bias is central to human understanding. [[Hans-Georg Gadamer]] argues that we don't need to eliminate bias, just need to admit to it. Must respect the bias of others and be open to the interplay of two perspectives in order to shape new understandings. #### p. 85 - [[Paulo Freire]] argued only those willing to learn can engage in dialogue. #### p. 89 - Dialogic ethics works as a form of moral jujitsu. Respect whatever you are faced with and take it seriously. Learn from what presents itself, whether wanted or not. Must meet the situation, positive or negative, with a desire to learn, not demand. Don't have to agree, just need to accept what is. #### p. 89 - There are times when it may be appropriate for communication to be monologic and/or uncivil. Also possible to engage in conflict and stay civil, as [[Gandhi]] did through [[satyagraha]]. #### p. 91 - [[dialogic communication ethics|Dialogic ethics]] requires acknowledging and understanding the standpoints of ourselves and the other. Begins with four questions: 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 ethics work as a learning model based upon self-reflective accountability? #### p. 92 - Four steps to [[dialogic learning]]. 1. Listening without demand 2. Attentiveness to the standpoints of the self, the Other, and the context of the historical moment. 3. Dialogic negotiation where the ethics answer emerges between people offering guidance for action, belief and understanding. 4. Temporal dialogic ethical competence to understand what worked and what changes now will help. ### Community of Memory and Dwelling #### p. 131 - [[organizational communication ethics|Organizational communication ethics]] is about the kind of dwelling place our communication practices build. We find meaning in communication through action with other persons within organizations. #### p. 135 - Daily communication practices form a [[dwelling place]] that demonstrates an understanding of what is good and what is not good within a given organizational structure. Each organization creates a [[dwelling place]] that welcomes some and dismisses others. > No organization is ethically neutral (p. 135). It is the negotiation of competing goods and values that keeps an organization vibrant. #### p. 136 - Organizational identity comes from the integration of current practices and memories of past and current practices that form a foundation for future communicative actions. New communication practices eventually become public story and policies. #### p. 136 - No dwelling place can remain alive and well without change. New historical moment calls for changing current practices in a way that contributes to continuation of traditions and values. - Current practices evoke change, and traditions work to preserve and make public expectations for retaining an organization's history and founding principles. #### p. 138 - [[organizations|Organizations]] are part of [[institutions]], which give them sense of identity, and organizations shape identity of institutions. > Institutions provide the "background" and organizations the "foreground," with the whole of the two together creating something greater than the sum of the parts (p. 139). [[Communication ethics]] is evidenced in an organization through four questions. #### p. 139 - Organizational communication and understanding shape an ongoing [[community of memory]]. > an organization holds more than one community of memory that offers a standard for challenge and change to other understandings of the good... (p. 140). #### p.141 - How we make meaning of history reveals how we protect and promote particular goods. > We cannot change events, but our telling, our way of making meaning of those events, does change with time, highlighting particular understandings of the good in organizational life (p. 141). #### p. 143 - Primary ethical principle for an organization is its ability to articulate what ti does so that it can be considered, critiqued and change can emerge. Congurence between [[community of memory]] and ongoing communication practices articulates the good that an organization seeks to protect and promote. ## My Questions & Thoughts Reflection questions (p. 147) - Consider an organization you're a part of. How would you identify the "community of memory" in that organization? Are there particular people who carry or represent this community of memory particularly well? Has the community of memory changed over time? If so, how? - What features of an organization most likely to make the organization a "dwelling place" for you? Are there specific communicative actions you can engage in that will help make that organization a dwelling place for others? --- # Other References TBR:: 🔖 MacIntyre, A. (1998). *A short history of ethics: A history of moral philosophy from the Homeric Age to the twentieth century* (2nd ed.). University of Notre Dame Press. (GR)