Dialogical Rationality (A working outline).
1) Define dialogical rationality or dialogical mode of understanding.
2) The purpose of dialogue:
2.1 Understanding the “Other.”
2.2 Testing our arguments (reasons). [Habermas]
2.3 Expanding our horizon (Gadamer).
3. Can we understand the “other” through dialogue?
4. What do we mean by understanding the other?
4.1 Understanding alien mode of thoughts?
4.2 Understanding the other in her otherness?
4.3 Understanding those parts of the ‘Thought” of the other that make her the other.
5. To understand the other is to take her seriously, i.e. to be ready to transform oneself if required.
6. Why is ‘dialogue’ unable to open up the other in her otherness (disclosure)?
6.1 Dialogue versus silence.
7. Why dialogue is ineffective in reaching understanding with the other?
7.1 Understanding work on the basis of background consensus. Even misunderstanding (as Gadamer emphasises) arises only in the background of deep understanding.
7.1 When the background consensus is thin or lacking, we are not really likely to talk to each other, we rather talk across each other.
7.2 When we talk to ‘other’ in view of her otherness, there is not enough background consensuses to form the basis of any meaningful understanding of her.
7.3 The issue can be understood by understanding the way the embedded rationality works.
7.4 “Silence” – the domain of other is located in the space of silence, and why?
8 A counterexample: Habermas’ argument and why is it a weak argument in this context.