newsroom

For Future Reference: Online Users in the Library

Mary Anne Hansen and Sheila Bonnand
Date: June 27, 2013
Time: 2:00 pm (EDT)

Online Educational Symposium Series

May 20, 2013

For Future Reference: Online Users in the Library

The June Edition of IGI Global's Free Educational Symposium Series

IGI GlobalLeave a CommentRead More

Social Technologies Titles

Valuing People and Technology in th...

Libraries, Telecentres, Cybercafes...

Intelligent Technologies for Bridgi...

Information and Communication Techn...

Search:
Sort by:		ResetSearch

Authentic and Inauthentic Dialogue

By IGI Global on Jul 16, 2010

IGI Global would like to thank Dr. Leonard Shedletsky for this contribution on social technologies and continuation on his topic of online discussion. His book, Cases on Online Discussion and Interaction: Experiences and Outcomes, was released by IGI Global.

We say that we "conduct" a conversation, but the more genuine a conversation is, the less its conduct lies within the will of either partner. Thus a genuine conversation is never the one that we wanted to conduct. Rather, it is generally more correct to say that we fall into conversation, or even that we become involved in it. The way one word follows another, with the conversation taking its own twists and reaching its own conclusion, may well be conducted in some way, but the partners conversing are far less the leaders of it than the led. No one knows in advance what will "come out" of a conversation (Gadamer, 1994, p. 383).

I feel like I am thinking out loud when I raise questions about authentic and inauthentic dialogue or speak of real talk (real dialogue) or even try to imagine the last time I was involved in such talk , in the classroom or out. I know I like it when I am involved in real talk and I imagine I know when it is happening. But I am not sure what it is or how to get there.

Here are three questions to start with:

What is authentic or real talk?
Why is it so hard to have authentic talk?
Would it be good to have authentic talk in our classes, online or face-to-face?

1. When I think about authentic talk I imagine talking to someone else about something that really matters to me and that gets my full attention and my best efforts to think. Often that means talking about our relationship and talking about whom I am. I imagine saying what I really think and hearing the same from another, not with the intention of hurting but with the intention of telling what we think. In this sense, what is said is genuine or authentic. Authentic talk burns more calories than chit chat.

Not too long ago I was complaining to a good friend of mine, who teaches philosophy, that I am disappointed with the discussion in my classes, and moreover, I see very little real talk going on in the world. What I see are instances of people trying to win arguments, arriving with conclusions.
He suggested that I read Hans-Georg Gadamer's ideas about discussion in Gadamer's book, Truth and Method, and I did. I believe Gadamer can help us out.

Let's start with my first question about the nature of authentic or real talk.
Gadamer offers his thoughts on this question. He focuses upon Platonic dialogues and the question and answer structure, especially the nature of the question and its relation to the questioner. Gadamer says that "In order to be able to ask, one must want to know, and that means knowing that one does not know" (p.363). We arrive at knowledge through the question and one key about questioning is " . . . the fact that the answer is not settled" (p. 363). The answer is genuinely not yet determined. In this way, the question is genuine or what Gadamer refers to as open. In fact, Gadamer contrasts this genuine question with the "pedagogical question." He is quite clear about seeing one's "orientation toward openness" as a key to questioning and seeking the truth, not necessarily to winning arguments.

2. I want to speculate here about the second question, why it is so hard to have authentic talk. Gadamer gives us a good start on offering an answer. If openness to a question is key to authentic talk and if that means that I would need to fully consider the other's ideas, then a few things follow: one, I may be challenging deep seated ideas of my own and this could threaten my identity. It could mean that I may decide that I have been wrong. Two, I might lose the argument and my view of things in my world. Now, if this is true, that is pretty threatening to me. Three, place me in the shoes of the teacher and place me in the classroom, face-to-face or online, and now I am potentially in a threatening position and in public. Do you feel my pain or your own? Gadamer says, "To conduct a conversation means to allow oneself to be conducted by the subject matter to which the partners in the dialogue are oriented. It requires that one does not try to argue the other person down but that one really considers the weight of the other's opinion. Hence it is an art of testing" (p.367).

3. So, given that an authentic dialogue in the classroom may lead us into areas that challenge our deepest beliefs, that this is done publicly, and that we are not in control of where the talk may go, is this a good thing to do in education?
Gadamer says in fact, "No one knows in advance what will "come out" of a conversation" (p. 383). It allows something to emerge, he says, that henceforth will exist.

I don't know if he ever responds directly to my question about whether or not to engage in authentic talk in the classroom for fear of its power. My gut feeling is that he would say to do it. I think I am raising a real question here. I am picturing both the exhilaration of authentic talk and tears that could come from the realization that some of my cherished beliefs are in need of repair. This is a point at which I do need to hear what others think.

Finally, in my initial posting, I asked you to respond to a questionnaire about discussion and I want to make those results available to you via this link.

Gadamer, H-G. (1994). (Second, Revised ed.). Truth and Method. NY: Continuum.

To read Dr. Shedletsky's previous post on generating successful online discussion, click here.

	Cases on Online Discussion and Interaction: Experiences and Outcomescontains examples of online discussions in a variety of contexts and for a variety of purposes, allowing readers to understand what is likely to facilitate discussion online, what is likely to encourage collaborative meaning-making, what is likely to encourage productive, supportive, engaged discussion, and what is likely to foster critical thinking. This book assembles cases that address an array of research methods, online communication media, forms of expression, communication contexts, and philosophical perspectives.

Cases on Online Discussion and Interaction: Experiences and Outcomescontains examples of online discussions in a variety of contexts and for a variety of purposes, allowing readers to understand what is likely to facilitate discussion online, what is likely to encourage collaborative meaning-making, what is likely to encourage productive, supportive, engaged discussion, and what is likely to foster critical thinking. This book assembles cases that address an array of research methods, online communication media, forms of expression, communication contexts, and philosophical perspectives.

Browse for more posts in:

Social Computing Human Aspects of Technology Cyber Behavior Social Technologies

No comments Comments

Be the first to comment!