Dialogue: Theorizing Difference in Communication Studies
Publication Year: 2004
“Anderson, Baxter, and Cissna provide readers with a valuable primer on the concept of dialogue as it relates to specific issues of communication…. The list of contributors reads like a Who's Who in the field of dialogue and communication…. Highly recommended.”
Dialogue: Theorizing Difference in Communication Studies is the first anthology of work on dialogic approaches to communication that offers a state-of-the-art collection of original essays in this emerging research area. Editors Rob Anderson, Leslie A. Baxter, and Kenneth N. Cissna have gathered the most respected scholars in the field to describe their research projects, discuss critical elements of dialogue, and anticipate the evolution of the study of dialogue. With a foreword by Julia T. Wood, contributors include James R. Taylor, Stanley Deetz and Jennifer Simpson, ...
- Front Matter
- Back Matter
- Subject Index
Part I: Exploring the Territories of Dialogue
- Chapter 2: Relationships Among Philosophies of Dialogue
- Chapter 3: Taking a Communication Perspective on Dialogue
- Chapter 4: The Ontological Workings of Dialogue and Acknowledgment
- Chapter 5: A Dialogic Ethic “Between” Buber and Levinas: A Responsive Ethical “I”
- Chapter 6: Dialogue, Creativity, and Change
Part II: Personal Voices in Dialogue
- Chapter 7: Dialogues of Relating
- Chapter 8: Dialogue as the Search for Sustainable Organizational Co-Orientation
- Chapter 9: Critical Organizational Dialogue: Open Formation and the Demand of “Otherness”
- Chapter 10: Dialectical Tensions and Dialogic Moments as Pathways to Peak Experiences
- Chapter 11: Double Binds as Structures in Dominance and of Feelings: Problematics of Dialogue
Part III: Public Voices in Dialogue
- Chapter 12: Public Dialogue and Intellectual History: Hearing Multiple Voices
- Chapter 13: Race and the (Im)Possibility of Dialogue
- Chapter 14: When Is Communication Intercultural? Bakhtin, Staged Performance, and Civic Dialogue
- Chapter 15: Media Studies and the Dialogue of Democracy
- Chapter 16: Concluding Voices, Conversation Fragments, and a Temporary Synthesis
Copyright © 2004 by Sage Publications, Inc.
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Sage Publications, Inc.
2455 Teller Road
Thousand Oaks, California 91320
Sage Publications Ltd.
6 Bonhill Street
London EC2A 4PU
Sage Publications India Pvt. Ltd.
B-42, Panchsheel Enclave
Post Box 4109
New Delhi 110 017 India
Printed in the United States of America
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Dialogue: theorizing difference in communication studies / Rob Anderson, Leslie A. Baxter, and Kenneth N. Cissna, editors.
Includes bibliographical references and index.
ISBN 0-7619-2670-4 (Cloth) — ISBN 0-7619-2671-2 (Paper)
1. Dialogue analysis. 2. Communication-Philosophy. I. Anderson, Rob, 1945- II. Baxter, Leslie A. III. Cissna, Kenneth N.
Printed on acid-free paper
03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
Acquiring Editor: Margaret H. Seawell
Editorial Assistant: Alicia Carter
Production Editor: Claudia A. Hoffman
Typesetter: C&M Digitals (P) Ltd.
Copy Editor: Edward Meidenbauer
Indexer: Molly Hall
About the Editors[Page vii]
Rob Anderson, professor of communication and professor of international studies at Saint Louis University, teaches and learns about dialogue in campus settings, interpersonal relationships, and media institutions. His articles on these topics have appeared since 1972 in journals from a variety of disciplines. A vigorous advocate of the dialogue of coauthorship, Rob's ten books include texts in communication theory and interviewing, as well as scholarly studies of public dialogue in contemporary journalism and intellectual history: The Conversation of Journalism (Praeger, 1994), The Reach of Dialogue (Hampton Press, 1994), The Martin Buber-Carl Rogers Dialogue (SUNY, 1997), and Moments of Meeting (SUNY, 2002). He believes the following to be therapeutic: Quiet dinners with Dona, sitting on the porch, watching soccer, Miles Davis on the stereo, and classes that talk back.
Leslie A. Baxter is F. Wendell Miller Distinguished Professor of Communication Studies at the University of Iowa. She teaches and conducts research on communication in personal and family relationships, as well as on qualitative and quantitative research methods. She is the recipient of the 1995 Berscheid/Hatfield Award for Mid-Career Achievement by the International Network on Personal Relationships and the 2002 Legacy Theory Award by the Communication Theory Interest Group of the Central States Communication Association. Dialogue is her third book in the past decade on dialogic approaches to communication, the first of which, Relating: Dialogues and Dialectics (with Barbara Montgomery; Guilford, 1996), received the G. R. Miller Distinguished Book Award from the Interpersonal Communication Division of the National Communication Association.
Kenneth N. Cissna is professor of communication at the University of South Florida. He is the author (with Rob Anderson) of Moments of Meeting: Buber, Rogers, and the Potential for Public Dialogue (SUNY, 2002) and The Martin Buber-Carl Rogers Dialogue: A New Transcript with Commentary (SUNY, 1997) as well as a monograph on “The Rhetoric of Public Dialogue” in Communication Research Trends (also with Meghan Clune, 2003). His edited [Page viii]book Applied Communication in the 21st Century (Lawrence Erlbaum, 1995) won the Outstanding Book award from the Applied Communication Division of the National Communication Association. He edited the Journal of Applied Communication Research and the Southern Communication Journal, and is past president of the Florida Communication Association. Currently, he serves as Vice President Elect of the Southern States Communication Association.
About the Contributors[Page ix]
Ronald C. Arnett, professor and chair in the Department of Communication and Rhetorical Studies at Duquesne University, is past editor of the Journal of Communication and Religion and president of both the State Communication Association of Pennsylvania and the Religious Communication Association. His books include Communication and Community: Implications of Martin Buber's Dialogue (SIU, 1986), for which he won the Religious Speech Communication Association Book Award; Dialogic Education: Conversations About Ideas and Between Persons (SIU, 1992); Dialogic Civility in a Cynical Age: Community, Hope, and Interpersonal Relationships (SUNY, 1999); and The Reach of Dialogue: Confirmation, Voice, and Community (which he coedited with Rob Anderson and Kenneth N. Cissna; Hampton Press, 1994). He received the Religious Communication Association Article Award in 1979 and 1999.
Laura Black is a doctoral student at the University of Washington. She is interested in dialogue theory and in the ways in which dialogue occurs in and is understood by members of groups and organizations. Her current research examines the training in dialogue that a manufacturing company provides its employees and describes how profound learning occurs even when dialogue is taught as a set of tools or skills. She is also studying how newcomers learn organizational cultures through stories and how collaborative storytelling can be used in small groups facing divisive moral conflicts.
Stanley Deetz is professor of communication at the University of Colorado, Boulder, where he teaches courses in organizational theory, organizational communication, and communication theory. He is the author, coauthor, or editor of Leading Organizations Through Transition (Sage, 2000), Doing Critical Management Research (Sage, 2000), Transforming Communication, Transforming Business (Hampton, 1995), Democracy in an Age of Corporate Colonization (SUNY, 1992), and eight other books. He has published 100 essays in scholarly journals and books regarding stakeholder representation, culture, and communication in corporate organizations. He has served as a consultant on culture, diversity, and participatory decision making for several major [Page x]corporations in the U.S. and Europe. He is a Fellow of the International Communication Association and served as ICA President, 1996–97.
H.L. Goodall, Jr., is professor and head of the Department of Communication at the University of North Carolina at Greensboro. He is the author or coauthor of 18 books and over 100 articles, chapters, and papers on communication and culture. As an ethnographer on the American scene, his work with dialogue began as a practical matter with in vivo explorations of self, others, and contexts in diverse settings—high tech cultures, rock and roll bands, political campaigns, and alternative spiritual communities. More recently, he has developed an interest in the dialectical tensions and ritual forms that characterize dialogic experiences, and the long-term effects of the presence of those tensions along with the absence of dialogue in families defined by secrets.
Leonard Clyde Hawes is professor of communication at the University of Utah. He is the author of a series of articles on dialogue, power, conversation, and politics in such journals as Text and Performance Quarterly, Communication Theory, and Communication Yearbook. His current book project addresses the problems of ethics and pragmatics when North American conflict resolution theory and practice are deployed in ethnically diverse, identity-based conflicts. He divides his time between the University of Utah, where he pursues the Mormon/secular division; the University of Aalborg, where he works on the Danish/“immigrants of color” division; and the University of Copenhagen, where he contributes to the Tibet Conflict Resolution project.
Michael J. Hyde is the University Distinguished Professor of Communication Ethics at Wake Forest University and a Fellow of the W. K. Kellogg Foundation. His research on the dialogic nature of human existence has appeared in many scholarly journals and books. His The Call of Conscience: Heidegger and Levinas, Rhetoric and the Euthanasia Debate (University of South Carolina Press, 2001) won the National Communication Association's Diamond Anniversary Book Award and the Marie Hochmuth Nichols Award. He is also the recipient of the Scholar Award for Communication Excellence in Ethics Education for the Mind, the Heart, and the Soul given by the Communication Ethics Center, Duquesne University. Currently, he is completing a book on The Life-Giving Gift of Acknowledgment.
Peter M. Kellett is associate professor of communication and Director of Graduate Studies at the University of North Carolina at Greensboro. He is the author of Managing Conflict in a Negotiated World: A Narrative Approach to Achieving Dialogue and Change (with D. G. Dalton; Sage, 2001) and several chapters and articles that explore the theory and practice of dialogue in analyzing, understanding, and managing human conflict. Currently, he is [Page xi]interested in how people learn to create more peaceful relationships from understanding their conflict experiences.
Sheila McNamee is professor of communication at the University of New Hampshire and holds the university's Class of 1944 Professorship. Her work focuses on dialogic transformation within a variety of social and institutional contexts, including psychotherapy, organizations, education, health care, and communities. She is the author of several books, including Relational Responsibility: Resources for Sustainable Dialogue (with Kenneth Gergen; Sage, 1999) as well as numerous articles and chapters on social constructionist theory and practice. She actively engages constructionist practices in a variety of contexts to bring communities of participants with diametrically opposing viewpoints together to create livable futures. She is a cofounder and Board member of the Taos Institute (http://www.taosinstitute.net), and she lectures and consults regularly.
Mark L. McPhail is professor of interdisciplinary studies in the Western College Program at Miami University. His research interests include rhetorical theory and epistemology, language and race relations, and visual communication. He is the author of Zen in the Art of Rhetoric: An Inquiry Into Coherence (SUNY, 1996), The Rhetoric of Racism Revisited: Reparations or Separation? (Rowman and Littlefield, 2002), and Double Consciousness in Black and White: Identity, Difference, and the Rhetorical Ideal of Life (Van Zelst Lecture, Northwestern University, 2001). His scholarship has been published in the Quarterly Journal of Speech, Critical Studies in Mass Communication, and the Howard Journal of Communications, and his creative work has appeared in Dark Horse Magazine and the American Literary Review.
John Pauly is professor of communication at Saint Louis University. His research on the history and sociology of mass communication has appeared in a variety of journals, including Communication, Journalism and Mass Communication Monographs, Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, Media Studies Journal, and American Quarterly. He has written extensively about public journalism and has participated in discussions of the movement at the Poynter Institute, American Press Institute, Kettering Foundation, and Stanford University. He is currently writing a book about the cultural and literary consequences of the New Journalism of the 1960s.
Kimberly A. Pearce is professor of speech communication at De Anza College, located in Cupertino, California. She is also cofounder of the Public Dialogue Consortium and Pearce Associates. She recently completed a training manual titled Making Better Social Worlds: Engaging and Facilitating Dialogic Communication (Pearce Associates, 2002). In addition to offering training in dialogic communication on three continents, she helped initiate, design, and facilitate a six-year public dialogue and community-building process for the city of Cupertino.
[Page xii]W. Barnett Pearce is professor in the School of Human and Organization Development at the Fielding Graduate Institute. He is a communication theorist involved with the development of the theory of the coordinated management of meaning. In addition, he is a founding member of the Public Dialogue Consortium and coprincipal of Pearce Associates, organizations through which he facilitates and offers training in the skills of dialogic communication. His publications include Moral Conflict: When Social Worlds Collide (with Stephen Littlejohn; Sage, 1997) and (with Kim Pearce) “Combining Passions and Abilities: Toward Dialogic Virtuosity” (Southern Communication Journal, 2000), “Extending the Theory of CMM through a Community Dialogue Process” (Communication Theory, 2000), and “Going Public: Working Systematically in Public” (Pluriverso, 2000).
John Shotter is professor of interpersonal relations in the Department of Communication, University of New Hampshire. His long-term interest is in the social conditions conducive to people having a voice in the development of participatory democracies and civil societies. He is the author of Social Accountability and Selfhood (Blackwell, 1984), Cultural Politics of Everyday Life: Social Constructionism, Rhetoric, and Knowing of the Third Kind (Open University, 1993), and Conversational Realities: The Construction of Life Through Language (Sage, 1993). In 1997 he was an Overseas Fellow at Churchill College, Cambridge, and a visiting professor at the Swedish Institute of Work Life Research, Stockholm, Sweden.
Jennifer Simpson is Coordinator for Student Affairs and lecturer in the Departments of Communication and Honors at the University of Colorado, Boulder. Her work bridges the theoretical and practical dimensions of dialogue. Believing in the importance of engaged scholarship, she uses her administrative experience to inform and enrich her teaching and scholarship, and in turn, her academic life informs and infuses her many other responsibilities on campus. A politically responsive, constructionist theory of communication is both informed by and informs her campus work on building community and multicultural development. She is a founder of the CU Dialogic Network, a group of faculty and staff members committed to using principles and practices of dialogue to inform and enrich campus conversations.
John Stewart is Vice President for Academic Affairs at the University of Dubuque. Since the 1970s, he has been learning and teaching dialogue philosophy and practice—for 32 years at the University of Washington. Since his 1978 article on the “Foundations of Dialogic Communication” in the Quarterly Journal of Speech, his scholarly and instructional writings have attempted to clarify the insights of dialogue philosophers and extend them to enhance dialogue practice in families, friendships, classrooms, and organizations. In recent years, John has coauthored all his professional writing in order to open [Page xiii]a space for dialogue in this part of his life. He is also committed to dialogue practice outside the academy.
Mary S. Strine is professor of communication at the University of Utah, where she teaches and conducts research in cultural studies, interpretive and critical theory, and performance studies. Her articles on modern critical theory, performance theory and criticism, and the relationship between American literature and culture (published in Text and Performance Quarterly, Western Journal of Communication, and various edited books) rely heavily on dialogic theory as their animating center. Her current research focuses on the cultural work of artistic representations and practices, specifically on the ways that aesthetic performances create a distinctive sphere of dialogic encounter by actively engaging and molding their audiences, and on the ways that such aesthetically framed “dialogues” contribute to racial, ethnic, and national identity formations.
James R. Taylor is emeritus professor of communication at the University of Montreal, and the author or coauthor of several books on the communication theory of the foundations of organizations, including The Emergent Organization: Communication as its Site and Surface (Lawrence Erlbaum, 2000) and The Computerization of Work: Organization, Communication and Change (Sage, 2001) as well as articles in such journals as Communication Theory, Communication Review, and others. In his writing on the topic, dialogue figures as the central mechanism for the construction of coorientation, the basis of all organization.
Julia T. Wood is the Lineberger Professor of Humanities and professor of communication studies at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. She teaches and conducts research on personal relationships; intimate partner violence; and intersections between gender, communication, and culture. She has written 15 books and edited 8 others, published more than 70 articles and book chapters, and presented over 100 papers at professional conferences. She has received ten awards for teaching and eleven for her scholarship. She lives with her partner, Robert Cox, who is also a professor of communication studies at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
Karen E. Zediker is a full-time lecturer at the University of Washington. Her dissertation developed a theoretical framework for understanding dialogue and how it concretely looks and sounds in classroom interaction. Her article with John Stewart, “Dialogue as Tensional, Ethical Practice,” in the Southern Communication Journal (2000), reflects her focus on the ways that ethical communicative choices reflect theoretical insights and practical decisions, and the centrality of moral judgment in dialogic encounters. She is committed to the processes of engaging in, teaching about, and facilitating dialogue in her professional and personal life.[Page xiv]
Foreword: Entering into Dialogue[Page xv]
The month of January takes its name from Janus, the Roman god whose two faces simultaneously look backward at the past and forward to the future. Like Janus, Dialogue: Theorizing Difference in Communication Studies looks backward at foundational and recent dialogical scholarship and peers forward to consider future challenges and opportunities for theory and praxis. Its Janus-like quality makes this volume an important marker of how our understandings of dialogue have developed and how they may evolve in the years to come.
In their introduction, editors Rob Anderson, Leslie Baxter, and Ken Cissna explain the organization of this book, preview the content, and discuss the book's broad themes. I will not repeat that coverage here. I would add, however, that Dialogue: Theorizing Difference in Communication Studies is unique in being the first collection of original essays on the theory and praxis of dialogue in the broad field of communication studies. The chapters presented here are uncommonly informed and informative, which is not surprising, as contributors to this volume include some of the most distinguished scholars in the field.
Chapter authors not only discuss, but also embody a dialogic approach to communication, knowledge, and identity. They do so by bringing dialogic thinkers into dialogue with one another and by asking how dialogic theories mutually form and inform one another and the process of communication. In exploring different currents within dialogue studies, this volume demonstrates that dialogic theory and praxis is not monolithic. Like other vibrant intellectual traditions, dialogue studies include different positions, some of which are in tension. For example, some dialogic theorists emphasize prescriptive attitudes and actions to improve the quality of communication, whereas other dialogic [Page xvi]theorists adopt a broader view of dialogue as inherent in all of social life. These differences add to the richness of dialogue studies and underline this volume's importance in bringing together distinct views of dialogue as theory and praxis.
To complement the editors’ introduction, I use this Foreword to look backward and forward. I first follow the volume's backwards gaze, which sketches humanistic, critical, and poststructural-postmodern branches in the family tree of dialogic theories and shows how these inform theory and praxis in diverse spheres of communication. Picking up on contributors’ discussions of generative possibilities for future work, I then look forward to consider ways of amplifying dialogue's critical impulses by further engagement with other intellectual traditions.
Part I, Exploring the Territories of Dialogue, traces the intellectual history of dialogic theory and introduces readers to key people and ideas that have shaped understandings of dialogue as a unique way of knowing and meeting others in conversation. John Stewart, Karen Zediker, and Laura Black lead off by delineating relationships among dialogic philosophers. Following this, Barnett Pearce and Kimberly Pearce sketch a specifically communication perspective on dialogue, asking not what dialogue is, but how it is made in communication. Ron Arnett draws on the work of Buber and Levinas to describe a communication ethic centered on a responsive I that is defined more by responsiveness than self-expression. The responsive I, the I-in-relation, also inspires Michael Hyde's meditation on being and acknowledgment and Sheila McNamee and John Shotter's discussion of how “we create possibilities moment by moment in dialogue with others.”
Despite variations among theorists, central to dialogue is the idea that any utterance or act is always responding to and anticipating other utterances and acts. Genuine dialogue depends less on self-expression and other transmissional aspects of communication than upon responsiveness. As Bakhtin (1981) insists, “each word tastes of the context and contexts in which it has lived its socially charged life” (p. 293). Yet it is not enough to say that response is central to dialogue. Response—or, more precisely, responsiveness—arises out of and is made possible by qualities of thought and talk that allow transformation in how one understands the self, others, and the world they inhabit. These qualities of thought and talk include willingness to risk change in one's own perspective and commitment to embracing and struggling with others whose worldviews may be radically different from and threatening to one's own. In signifying a hope for a particular kind of praxis, dialogue presupposes and means other things as well.
- It means that communication is not linear, nor even merely interactive. Instead, it is a fluctuating, unpredictable, multivocal process in which uncertainty infuses encounters between people and what they mean and become. As [Page xvii]Leslie Baxter notes in her chapter, social life and dialogue are fragmented and definitely, if not always obviously, disorderly. Dialogue is emergent (rather than preformed), fluid (rather than static), keenly dependent on process (at least as much as content), performative (more than representational), and never fully finished (rather than completed).
- It means that interlocutors are immersed in a process that shapes and forms them even as they shape and form it and one another in ways that are not entirely predictable or finalizable. Addressing this in his chapter, James Taylor emphasizes that identity emerges in and through communication. Whoever we are before we enter into dialogue, those are not the selves that exist during, after, and because of dialogue. Just as language has no independent life apart from the world in which it participates, selves have no independent life apart from the world that arises in interaction. In this sense, dialogic engagement predates selfhood, both of which are fluid and continually remade. The I that I take myself to be is (co)authored continuously in relation to others with whom I interact. In other words, dialogic communication is productive, or constitutive, rather than reproductive of previous experiences and ways of interpreting and assigning meanings to them. Each communicator is implicated in a particular historical-social-political discursive context, which frames and, in turn, is framed by communicators and what happens between them. In dialogue, communicators order each other and allow themselves to be ordered. They simultaneously voice and risk their perspectives.
- It means that tension is inherent in and integral to dialogue. Tension may be of many sorts: tension between the perspective one holds at a given moment and the perspective of an other(s); tension between possible views and versions of self; tension between alternative ways of ordering and acting in the world. We enter into dialogue with perspectives—beliefs, opinions, values, assumptions, interests, and so forth—on ourselves, others, and the world. Yet we hold these perspectives provisionally, if dearly. We allow—perhaps even embrace—tension between our perspectives and those of others, which may challenge and change our own. In conversation, we resist tendencies to reconcile or synthesize perspectives, much less to choose between them. Instead, we wrestle with the discomfort that comes from lack of closure and lack of unquestionably right answers.
- It means that dialogue does not necessarily idealize or seek common ground. The search for (and belief in) common ground may thwart, rather than facilitate, genuine dialogue, because almost inevitably the dominant culture defines what ground is common or legitimate. Rather than the reproductive goal of finding “common ground” or “resolving differences,” dialogue allows differences to exist without trying to resolve, overcome, synthesize, or [Page xviii]otherwise tame them. In the words of Cervenak, Cespedes, Souza, and Straub (2002), “If we begin by embracing conflict and contradiction for what they can teach us, the elusive goal of unity becomes less important than the process of learning to listen” (p. 352). Listening without being driven to find common ground opens the possibility of creating new ground—new ways of understanding self, other, and the social, symbolic, and material world. By extension, this means that dialogue does not necessarily preclude standing one's ground firmly, but it does require that in doing so one remain open to the call of the other.
- It means that we are realized in the process of dialogue. Points of view, relationships, and selves are not static. Rather they are fluid processes that are continuously open to being (re)formed, largely through interaction between people. For this reason, we are compelled to rethink familiar interpersonal concepts and the meanings and functions that actors and researchers assign to them. For example, rather than being a revelation of a preformed, preexisting self, self-disclosure is understood to be an authoring, or coauthoring—a coming into being in the process of conversation with an other.
Building on the philosophical foundations of Part I, the chapters in Parts II and III show that dialogue applies theoretically and pragmatically to communication in the public sphere, organizations, cultural and intercultural spaces, and performance venues—in short, to human communication in the range of contexts it inhabits. The chapters in Part II, Personal Voices in Dialogue, interrogate the possibilities for dialogue in personal, organizational, and group contexts. In her chapter, Leslie Baxter provides a remarkably rich discussion of dialogic work on personal relationships and interpersonal interaction. James Taylor explores the value of dialogic theory and praxis in building and sustaining coorientation in organizations. Working with the complementarity and tension between critical hermeneutic and postmodern conceptions of dialogue, Stanley Deetz and Jennifer Simpson develop a politically responsive constructionist theory of communication that emphasizes responsiveness to the demands of others in organizational life. H. L. Goodall and Peter Kellett offer an account of the process and outcomes of their own dialogic engagement with each other, signaling the potential of dialogue to open us to new ways of understanding and acting in our scholarly activities. Concluding Part II is Leonard Hawes's chapter, which contemplates both the difficulties and the importance of dialogue in situations that are marked by power relations that give birth to strong emotional responses.
Concern with dialogue in the civic sphere is the focus of Part III, Public Voices in Dialogue. Here Kenneth Cissna and Rob Anderson illuminate [Page xix]the potential of dialogue to improve public conversation; Mark McPhail interrogates the possibilities of dialogue about race; Mary Strine draws connections between dialogue, performance, and civic engagement; and John Pauly asks why dialogue and media studies have so seldom crossed paths and how greater rapprochement with dialogic traditions might alter media's view of its role and function in civic society. Contributors to Parts II and III eschew conservative views of dialogue as interaction between preformed and relatively autonomous selves who simply need to be revealed, or performed, and understood by an other. Contributors point out that genuine dialogue in personal and public settings demands more than response to preformed selves and a preordered common ground that tends to exclude all that is outside of it.
In place of this limited view, contributors encourage us to embrace a richer understanding of dialogue that takes into account social, historical, political, material, and linguistic contexts that shape meanings, selves, perspectives, and communication. Several contributors draw on the work of critical scholars such as Gadamer and Habermas, who focus on interaction as a site of meaning and endeavor to develop phenomenological conceptions of reason that are congenial with dialogic theory. Expanding this inclination, some authors attend to postmodern theorists such as Derrida and Foucault, who assume that selves are radically indeterminate and unstable, and they highlight otherness and the productive role of conflict in transforming the social world and those who live, work, and communicate within it.
In embracing critical and postmodern impulses, this volume points toward lines of future dialogical work aimed at theorizing possibilities for transformation of individuals, relationships, and the social world. For example, in his chapter on race, McPhail reminds us—as do critical theorists such as Fraser (1992) and Mouffe (2000)—that genuine dialogue is not always possible in the social world as it is currently constituted. Ensconced power hierarchies and the inequities to which they give rise sometimes undermine normative conceptions of communication such as Habermas's (1990, 1992) ideal speech situation and Buber's I-Thou dialogue. Sharing McPhail's concern about the reach of dialogue, Deetz and Simpson note that the call for dialogue is a hope. Hope is not a guarantee that dialogue can happen. In addition to hope, there must be a concerted, committed effort to cultivate conditions that foster, or at the least allow, dialogue between people—not just people who have polite differences, but also people who hold profoundly different perspectives that are born of locations in radically uneven social, material, and symbolic circumstances.
The social world is infused by power differences that have implications for the possibilities of dialogue. Why should a CEO engage in dialogue with a line worker who wants better working conditions but cannot afford to risk her or his job? Why should middle-class citizens on pristine property enter into [Page xx]dialogue with disadvantaged citizens who are angry that their neighborhood has been chosen as the site for a toxic waste dump? Why should men enter into dialogue with women who resent the fact that even in two-worker families, childcare and homemaking responsibilities are still primarily assumed by women? In short, not everyone wants or needs to enter into dialogue. Those who enjoy power and privilege often feel no motivation to interact dialogically with those who do not benefit from the same status and advantage. As Mouffe (2000) bluntly notes, “No amount of dialogue or moral preaching will ever convince the ruling class to give up its power” (p. 15). Yet for dialogue to be possible, people—particularly those who enjoy relative privilege—must take responsibility for identifying and reducing socially determined asymmetries that dictate who gets to speak, what forums and forms of speech are deemed legitimate, whose speech counts, and to whom it counts. It is difficult to imagine what might motivate such efforts on the part of those who are comfortable within current social structures, but precisely this kind of imagining is needed.
The critical possibilities of dialogue lie in its refusal to privilege any single voice, perspective, or ideology. It insists on the superiority of multivocality. But how does this insistence translate into praxis? What can prompt dialogic engagement from those who are not already inclined toward it, those whose social locations do not motivate them to risk their material well-being or their comfortable conceptions of self and social life? If people who enjoy power and privilege choose not to engage in dialogue, does this leave those who seek dialogue vulnerable to being silenced, frustrated, or exploited by those who do not? This seems to be McPhail's tentative conclusion, at least when dialogue attempts to deal with issues of race and racism. On a more hopeful note, Leonard Hawes suggests that discourse has the capacity to redistribute human subjectivity and agency. Pursuing this idea, it will be fruitful to theorize the possibilities and limits of dialogue, understood as inherent in the character of all social life, as a way to redistribute human subjectivity, as well as human locations and privilege.
In opening The Dialogic Emergence of Culture, Tedlock and Mannheim (1995) state that spoken words would “hardly be worthy of the name ‘language’ unless they were addressed to someone, and unless that someone had the capacity to reply” (p. 8). I agree, yet note that the meaning of “the capacity to reply” is not transparent. What is entailed in “the capacity to reply” or respond? Does it imply only the ability to respond within structural boundaries legitimized by and comfortable for dominant groups? Or might the capacity to respond be understood to allow for, perhaps encourage, responses that fall outside of interaction—both content and form—familiar to and favored by those at the center of cultural life?
To make the point another way, allowing different voices into conversation is not sufficient to foster responsiveness and possibilities for transformation. [Page xxi]We must also be open to changing what we consider open, responsive communication to be—that is, what forms it may take. We must be willing to open the conversation not only to different voices, but also to different ways of enacting voice. Critical scholarship has done much to document the unequal value assigned to different ways of communicating in Western culture. Cox (2001) recounts instances in which the normative procedures of government agencies defined the voices of low-income citizens as “indecorous” and discounted their discursive standing in allegedly public hearings about environmental health and safety. Conventionally feminine ways of enacting voice are still not regarded as equal to—that is, not as strong, persuasive, legitimate, or effective as—traditionally masculine modes of enacting voice. Vernacular Black English and traditional African American communication styles are still regarded by many as substandard to White, middle-class diction and style. Feminist scholars (Harding, 1991; Minister, 1991; Spender, 1985) and critical-race scholars (West, 1993b; Williams, 1992) note that whereas members of marginal groups often learn to communicate in the ways approved by dominant culture, the converse seldom occurs. How can people enter into dialogue on equal bases if the preferred communication style of only some participants is regarded as legitimate?
The risks entailed in genuine dialogue are unlikely to be embraced without confidence that one's self can remain whole and functional even if one's worldview is shaken. In her critique of conventional Western science, Keller (1985) resoundingly criticized the modernist idea(1) of autonomy in both scientific enterprises and everyday interactions. Modernist autonomy entails a rigid separation between researcher/self and object of research/other. To preserve scientific objectivity and the integrity of self in everyday life, a scientist/self must be radically independent of objects of research/others. Finding this view of autonomy inaccurate and unproductive, Keller proposed dynamic autonomy as an alternative. The scientist/self who develops dynamic autonomy understands that the scientist/self and objects of research/other are simultaneously connected and distinct, at once interdependent and independent. Thus, the scientist/self can be open to influence from the object of research/other, confident that such influence will not erase or colonize the self. This kind of confidence seems to be what Anzaldúa (2002) has in mind when she urges “honoring people's otherness in ways that allow us to be changed by embracing that otherness rather than punishing others for having a different view, belief system, skin color, or spiritual practice” (p. 4). Concepts such as dynamic autonomy might contribute to efforts to theorize what is necessary for individuals to take the risks of engaging in dialogue.
Dialogic theory will also be enriched by its growing engagement with critical-cultural traditions. For example, as Deetz and Simpson note, feminist standpoint theory might inform dialogic theory's efforts to deal with power [Page xxii]differences between actual or potential interlocutors. Feminist standpoint theory is centrally concerned with the relationship between epistemic locations and power, opportunities, and perspectives on social life (Collins, 1986, 1998, 2000; Haraway, 1988; Harding, 1991, 1998; Hartsock, 1983; Smith, 1987). Standpoint theorists insist that profound differences in perspective can be appreciated and, to some extent, known. Entering into unfamiliar standpoints requires commitment and struggle, to be sure, but it is possible. This must be the case if either standpoint theory or dialogic theory is to be useful in recognizing, challenging, and changing inequities in personal, interpersonal, and public life.
Other critical-cultural traditions also seem congenial with dialogic theory. In questioning some of the most dearly held assumptions about selfhood, queer theory (Butler, 1999; Kirsch, 2001; Sedgwick, 1990) invites us to rethink what it means to be male, female, gay, lesbian, heterosexual, bisexual, transsexual, and transgendered. As categories of identity that have been assumed to be stable are claimed to be fluid, new understandings of self and others become possible. Critical race theory (Crenshaw, Gotanda, Peller, & Thomas, 1996; Delgado & Stefancic, 1997) advances important insights pertinent to dialogue. Understanding and engaging in dialogue requires a reflexive understanding of self, which critical race scholars’ interrogation of Whiteness attempts to provoke in Whites. Performance ethnography might also be a productive ally for dialogical theory. In addition to Anna Deavere Smith, whose remarkable work Strine highlights, ethnographic performance work by Boal (1985), Conquergood (1988, 1991, 1992, 1998), and Madison (1999, in press) calls attention to the importance of embodied knowledge—bodily knowledge—as a means of gaining deeper understanding of those who differ from us.
In addition to theorizing conditions that foster dialogue, we should also ask when dialogue is a preferred option for productive, transformative human interaction. Are there times and issues for which nondialogic modes of action and interaction may be more productive—and productive might be defined in various ways—than dialogue? Nondialogic modes of action include strategic, rhetorical, and confrontational communication, all of which can foment transformation in individuals and social perspectives. Those who historically have been denied voices may reasonably believe that in some circumstances nondialogic alternatives are more empowering and have greater potential than dialogue to compel members of the dominant group to recognize and respond to them. Certainly Rosa Parks and Mother Jones relied on nondialogic communication to mobilize others who were able to contain or constrain dominants and ultimately force dominants to respond. The same may be said of the Crown Heights Riots and Stonewall, which gave voice to marginal groups whose efforts to gain a hearing in other ways were ignored.
[Page xxiii]Nondialogic forms of communication have been well recognized, even centered, in a field that historically has championed communicative forms such as debate, persuasion, and public address. What yet needs to be done is to define when these forms of communication are appropriate and likely to be effective and when dialogue is likely to be appropriate and effective. In other words, specifying hospitable contexts and conditions would clarify the theoretical and pragmatic scope of dialogue. I suspect that this kind of specification will be most productive if it draws not on dialogic traditions that aim to produce principles for improving communication, but rather on those that regard dialogue as an inherent, inescapable, and pervasive feature of all social life and interaction.
Like dialogue itself, the ideas in Dialogue: Theorizing Difference in Communication Studies are not finalized or finalizable. In providing a superb rendering of the intellectual history, current state, and future possibilities of dialogue, this landmark volume makes a major contribution to communication research, theory, and praxis that aim to include and respect multiple voices and ways of voicing.[Page xxiv]
References[Page 269]1980). Social justice in the liberal state. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.(1969). For Marx. London: Verso.(1973). Social penetration: The development of interpersonal relationships. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston., & (1997). Conversation, language, and possibilities: A postmodern approach to therapy. New York: Basic Books.(1979). Students as real people: Interpersonal communication and education. Rochelle Park, NJ: Hayden.(1982). Phenomenological dialogue, humanistic psychology and pseudo-walls: A response and extension. Western Journal of Speech Communication, 46, 344–357. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10570318209374093(1984). Response to the symposium “Empathic Listening.”Communication Education, 33, 195–196. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03634528409384738(1991). The Buber-Rogers dialogue: Studying the influence of role, audience, and style. Presented at the international, interdisciplinary conference “Martin Buber: His Impact on the Human Sciences,” San Diego State University, San Diego, CA., & (1996). Criticism and conversational texts: Rhetorical bases of role, audience, and style in the Buber-Rogers dialogue. Human Studies, 19, 85–118. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00142857, & (1997). The Martin Buber-Carl Rogers dialogue: A new transcript with commentary. Albany: State University of New York Press., & (Anderson, R., Cissna, K. N., & Arnett, R. C. (Eds.). (1994). The reach of dialogue: Confirmation, voice, and community. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.1994). The conversation of journalism: Communication, community, and news. Westport, CT: Praeger., , & (2002). Preface: (Un)natural bridges, (un)safe spaces. In G.Anzaldúa & A.Keating (Eds.), This bridge we call home: Radical visions for transformation (pp. 1–5). New York: Routledge.(1979). Toward a transformation of philosophy (G.Adey & D.Frisby, Trans.). London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.(1959). The human condition. New York: Anchor.(1968). Men in dark times. New York: Harcourt, Brace & World.([Page 270]1992). Hannah Arendt/Karl Jaspers: Correspondence, 1926–1969 (R.Kimber & R.Kimber, Trans.; L.Kohler & H.Saner, Eds.). New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich., & (1980). Thirty seconds. New York: Farrar, Straus & Giroux.(1978). Self-fulfillment and interpersonal communication?Religious Communication Today, 1, 23–28.(1980). Dwell in peace: Applying nonviolence to everyday relationships. Elgin, IL: The Brethren Press.(1981). Toward a phenomenological dialogue. Western Journal of Speech Communication, 45, 201–212. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10570318109374043(1982). Rogers and Buber: Similarities, yet fundamental differences. Western Journal of Speech Communication, 46, 358–372. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10570318209374094(1986). Communication and community: Implications of Martin Buber's dialogue. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.(1989). What is dialogic communication? Friedman's contribution and clarification. Person-Centered Review, 4, 42–60.(1992). Dialogic education: Conversation about ideas and between people. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.(1997). Therapeutic communication: A moral cul de sac. In S. L.Longenecker (Ed.), The dilemma of Anabaptist piety: Strengthening or straining the bonds of community (pp. 149–160). Camden, ME: Penobscot Press.(2001). Dialogic civility as pragmatic ethical praxis: An interpersonal metaphor for the public domain. Communication Theory, 11, 315–338. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2885.2001.tb00245.x(1999). Dialogic civility in a cynical age: Community, hope, and interpersonal relationships. Albany: State University of New York Press., & (1983). The assumptive roots of empathic listening: A critique. Communication Education, 32, 368–378. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03634528309378558, & (1987). The Afrocentric idea. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.(1979). The contribution of Habermas to rhetorical validity. Journal of the American Forensic Association, 16, 104–111.(1984). Four approaches to interpersonal communication. Western Journal of Speech Communication, 48, 408–440. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10570318409374173(2001). Ethics: An essay on the understanding of evil. London: Verso.(1965). Rabelais and his world (H.Iswolsky, Trans.). Bloomington: Indiana University Press.(1981). The dialogic imagination: Four essays by M. M. Bakhtin (M.Holquist, Ed.; C.Emerson & M.Holquist, Trans.). Austin: University of Texas Press.(1984). Problems of Dostoevsky's poetics (C.Emerson, Ed. & Trans.). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.(1986). Speech genres and other late essays (C.Emerson & M.Holquist, Eds.; V. W.McGee, Trans.). Austin: University of Texas Press.(1990). Art and answerability: Early philosophical works byM. M.Bakhtin (M.Holquist & V.Liapunov, Eds.; V.Liapunov, Trans.). Austin: University of Texas Press.(1993). Toward a philosophy of the act (V.Liapunov & M.Holquist, Eds.; V.Liapunov, Trans.). Austin: University of Texas Press.([Page 271]1963). The fire next time. New York: Dell.(1984). Strong democracy: Participatory politics for a new age. Berkeley: University of California Press.(1988). The conquest of politics: Liberal philosophy in democratic times. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.(1989). Liberal democracy and the costs of consent. In N. L.Rosenblum (Ed.), Liberalism and the moral life (pp. 54–68). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.(1993). Tightening the iron cage—Concertive control in self-managing teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 38, 408–437. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2393374(1998). Creativity and improvisation in jazz and organizations: Implications for organizational learnings. Organization Science, 9, 605–622. http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/orsc.9.5.605(1981). Theory of the text. In R.Young (Ed. & Trans.), Untying the text: A post-structuralist reader (pp. 31–47). Boston: Routledge & Kegan Paul.(1961). Perceval's narrative: A patient's account of his psychosis. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.(1972). Steps to an ecology of mind. New York: Ballantine.(1979). Mind in nature: A necessary unity. London: E.P. Dutton.(1956). Toward a theory of schizophrenia. Behavioral Science, 1, 251–264. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/bs.3830010402, , & (1963). A note on the double bind–1962. Family Process, 2, 154–161. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1545-5300.1963.00154.x, , & (1992). Intimations of postmodernity. London: Routledge.(1987). Symbols of relationship identity in relationship cultures. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 4, 261–280. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/026540758700400302(1990). Dialectical contradictions in relationship development. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 7, 69–88. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0265407590071004(2002). Performing marriage: The marriage renewal ritual as cultural performance. Southern Communication Journal, 67, 94–109. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10417940209373223, & (Stepchildren's perceptions of the contradictions of communication with stepparents. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships., , , & (in press).2002). Contradictions of interaction for wives of elderly husbands with adult dementia. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 30, 1–26. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00909880216576, , , & (1999). Turning points in the development of blended families. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 16, 291–313. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0265407599163002, , & (1986). Turning points in developing romantic relationships. Human Communication Research, 12, 469–493. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.1986.tb00088.x, & (J. S.Seiter & H.Gass (Eds.), Readings in persuasion, social influence, and compliance-gaining. New York: Allyn & Bacon., & (in press). Social influence in close relationships. In2001). Perceived aesthetic characteristics of interpersonal conversations. Southern Communication Journal, 67, 1–18. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10417940109373215, & , Jr. (2001). Rules for relating communicated among social network members. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 18, 173–200. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0265407501182002, , & ([Page 272]1999). Perceptions of dialectical contradictions in turning points of development in heterosexual romantic relationships. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 16, 547–569. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0265407599165001, & (1997). Everyday loyalties and betrayals in personal relationships. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 14, 655–678. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0265407597145005, , , , , & (1996). Relating: Dialogues and dialectics. New York: Guilford Press., & (2001). Communicatively remembering turning points of relationship development. Communication Reports, 14, 1–18. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08934210109367732, & (1993). Relationship maintenance strategies and dialectical contradictions in personal relationships. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 10, 225–242. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/026540759301000204, & (Couple perceptions of their similarities and differences: A dialectical perspective. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships., & (in press).1993). Revealing and not revealing the status of romantic relationships to social networks. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 10, 321–338. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0265407593103002, & (1979). Elements of dialogic communication in Gandhi's second round table conference address. Southern Speech Communication Journal, 44, 386–398. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10417947909372428, , & (1973). The denial of death. New York: The Free Press.(2002). Infant research and adult treatment: Co-constructing interactions. Hillsdale, NJ: Analytic Press., & (1999, October 31). Parents blaming parents. The New York Times Magazine, 60–67, 78, 94, 100.(1985). Habits of the heart: Individualism and commitment in American life. Berkeley: University of California Press., , , , & (1975). Some explorations in initial interaction and beyond: Toward a developmental theory of interpersonal communication. Human Communication Research, 1, 99–112. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.1975.tb00258.x, & (1988). “Failure communication” as a surplus: Dialogue and lack of dialogue between Buber and Levinas. In R.Bernasconi (Ed.), The provocation of Levinas (pp. 100–135). London: Routledge.(1986). Philosophical profiles. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.(1987). Arguing and thinking: A rhetorical approach to social psychology. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.(1963). The fire next time. Review of The fire next time by JamesBaldwin. New York Times. Retrieved August 30, 2002, from http://partners.nytimes.com/books/98/03/29/specials/baldwin-fire.html(1992). The American religion. New York: Simon & Schuster.(1969). Symbolic interactionism: Perspective and method. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.(1985). Theatre of the oppressed (C. & M.McBride, Trans.). New York: Theatre Communications Group.([Page 273]1951). Quantum theory. New York: Prentice-Hall.(1966). The special theory of relativity. New York: W. A. Benjamin.(1980). Wholeness and the implicate order. London: Routledge.(1990). On dialogue. Ojai, CA: David Bohm Seminars.(1996). On dialogue (L.Nichol, Ed.). London: Routledge.(1991). Dialogue: A proposal. Retrieved October 3, 2002, from http://www.infed.org/archives/e-texts/bohm_dialogue.htm, , & (1996). Public deliberation: Pluralism, complexity, and democracy. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.(1955). Ethics (N. H.Smith, Trans.). New York: Touchstone.(2001, September 23). Aftermath. The Cincinnati Enquirer, p. F1.(1980). Adam Muller on the dialogic nature of rhetoric. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 66, 169–181. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00335638009383513(1998). Taylor's practical reason and moral decision-making among journalists. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Stanford University.(1990). A certain blindness: A Black family's quest for the promise of America. Atlanta: ALP Publishing.(1995). “I do” again: The relational dialectics of renewing marriage vows. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 12, 177–198. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0265407595122002, & (2002, February). “You're my parent but you're not my parent”: Contradictions of communication between stepchildren and their nonresidential parents. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Western States Communication Association, Long Beach, CA., & (1998). The role of rituals in the management of the dialectical tension of “old” and “new” in blended families. Communication Studies, 48, 101–112. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10510979809368523, , & (1961). The political context of sociology. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.(1992). Blended relationships: Friends as work associates. Western Journal of Communication, 56, 200–225. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10570319209374414, & (1973). Monologue to dialogue: An exploration of interpersonal communication. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall., & (1973). Communication in human relationships. Skokie, IL: National Textbook., & (1990). Acts of meaning. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.(1957). Elements of the interhuman. Psychiatry, 20, 105–113.(1958). I and thou (2nd ed.; R. G.Smith, Trans.). New York: Scribner.(1965a). Between man and man (M.Friedman, Ed.; R. G.Smith, Trans.). New York: Macmillan.(1965b). The knowledge of man: A philosophy of the interhuman (M.Friedman, Ed.; M.Friedman & R. G.Smith, Trans.). New York: Harper & Row.(1967a). Hope for this hour. In F. W.Matson & A.Montagu (Eds.), The human dialogue: Perspectives on communication (pp. 306–312). New York: Free Press.(1967b). Replies to my critics. In P. A.Schilpp & M.Friedman (Eds.), The philosophy of Martin Buber (pp. 689–744). New York: Open Court.(1970). I and thou (W.Kaufmann, Trans.). New York: Scribner.([Page 274]1973). Meetings (M.Friedman, Ed.). LaSalle, IL: Open Court Press.(1991). Tales of the Hasidim (O.Marx, Trans.). New York: Schocken Books.(1996). Paths in utopia (R. F. C.Hull, Trans.). Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press.(1998). The knowledge of man: Selected essays (M.Friedman, Ed.; M.Friedman & R. G.Smith, Trans.). New York: Humanity Books.(1989). On symbols and society (J. R.Gusfield, Ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.(1979). On the foundations of rationality: Toulmin, Habermas, and the a priori of reason. Journal of the American Forensic Association, 16, 112–127.(1979). Habermas’ theory of communication: A critical explication. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 65, 412–428. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00335637909383492, & (1997a). Excitable speech: A politics of the performative. New York: Routledge.(1997b). The psychic life of power. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.(1999). Gender trouble ((10th anniversary ed.). New York: Routledge.1995). Modality in grammar and discourse. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/tsl.32, & (1971). The Hollywood TV producer: His work and his audience. New York: Basic.(Carey, J. W. (Ed.). (1988). Media, myths, and narratives: Television and the press. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.1989). Communication as culture: Essays on media and society. Boston: Unwin Hyman.(1997). James Carey: A critical reader (E.S.Munson & C. A.Warren, Eds.). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.(1999). Levinas and Buber: Transcendence and society. Sophia, 38, 69–92. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02786333(2000). Dewey on democracy. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.(2002). Imagining differently: The politics of listening in a feminist classroom. In G.Anzaldúa & A.Keating (Eds.), This bridge we call home: Radical visions for transformation (pp. 341–356). New York: Routledge., , , & (1995). Doing public journalism. New York: Guilford.(1996). From diatribe to dialogue on divisive public issues: Approaches drawn from family therapy. Mediation Quarterly, 13, 323–345. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/crq.3900130408, , , , , & , Jr. (1987). Beyond truth and method: On misreading Gadamer's praxical hermeneutics. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 73, 183–199. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00335638709383802(1988). More speech: Dialogue rights and modern liberty. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.(2002). Media control: The spectacular achievements of propaganda. New York: Seven Stories Press.(1977). Fifty years of scholarship in media ethics. Journal of Communication, 27(4), 19–29. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.1977.tb01852.x(1988). Dialogic communication theory and cultural studies. Studies in Symbolic Interaction, 9, 3–31.(1991). Communication ethics. Communication Research Trends, 11 (4), pp. 1–34.([Page 275]1995). Communication ethics as the basis of genuine democracy. In P.Lee (Ed.), The democratization of communication (pp. 75–91). Cardiff, UK: University of Wales Press.(1997). The common good and universal values. In J.Black (Ed.), Mixed news: The public/civic/communitarian journalism debate (pp. 18–33). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.(2000). Social dialogue and media ethics. Ethical Perspectives, 7(2–3), 182–193. http://dx.doi.org/10.2143/EP.7.2.503805(1993). Good news: Social ethics and the press. New York: Oxford University Press., , & (Cissna, K. N. (Ed.) (1995). Applied communication in the 21st century. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.1986, November). Empathy, genuineness and communication: The concept of dialogue of Carl R. Rogers. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Speech Communication Association, Chicago., & (1990). The contributions of Carl Rogers to a philosophical praxis of dialogue. Western Journal of Speech Communication, 54, 125–147. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10570319009374331, & (1994a). Communication and the ground of dialogue. In R.Anderson, K. N.Cissna, & R. C.Arnett (Eds.), The reach of dialogue: Confirmation, voice, and community (pp. 9–30). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton., & (1994b). The 1957 Martin Buber-Carl Rogers dialogue, as dialogue. Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 34, 11–45. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/00221678940341003, & (1996). Dialogue in public: Looking critically at the Buber-Rogers dialogue. In M.Friedman (Ed.), Martin Buber and the human sciences (pp. 191–206). Albany: State University of New York Press., & (1997). Carl Rogers in dialogue with Martin Buber: A new analysis. Person-Centered Journal, 4, 4–13., & (1998a). Correction to: “Carl Rogers in dialogue with Martin Buber: A new analysis.”Person-Centered Journal, 5, 63–65., & (1998b). Theorizing about dialogic moments: The Buber-Rogers position and postmodern themes. Communication Theory, 8, 63–104. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2885.1998.tb00211.x, & (2002). Moments of meeting: Buber, Rogers, and the potential for public dialogue. Albany: State University of New York Press., & (1979, February). Interactional foundations of interpersonal confirmation. A paper presented at the International Communication Association/National Communication Association Postdoctoral Conference, “Human Communication from the Interactional View,” Asilomar, CA., & (1981). Patterns of interactional confirmation and disconfirmation. In C.Wilder-Mott & J. H.Weakland (Eds.), Rigor and imagination: Essays from the legacy of Gregory Bateson (pp. 253–282). New York: Praeger., & (1973). Martin Buber, dialogue, and the philosophy of rhetoric. In D. G.Douglas (Ed.), Philosophers on rhetoric (pp. 225–242). Skokie, IL: National Textbook.(1984). Mikhail Bakhtin. Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press., & (2000). Resolving personal and organizational conflict. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass., & ([Page 276]2001, March 19). The legacy of Columbine. Time, 32–35.(1985). Introduction. In E.Levinas, Time and the other (R. A.Cohen, Trans.; pp. 1–27). Pittsburgh, PA: Duquesne University Press.(1998). Introduction. In E.Levinas, Otherwise than being or beyond essence (A.Lingis, Trans.; pp. vi–xvi). Pittsburgh, PA: Duquesne University Press.(1980). Martin Buber: A bibliography of his writings 1897–1978. Jerusalem and Munich: Magnes Press and K. G. Saur., & (1992). Abortion & dialogue: Pro-choice, pro-life, & American law. Bloomington: University of Indiana Press.(1986). Learning from the outsider within. Social Problems, 23, 514–532.(1990). Black feminist thought: Knowledge, consciousness, and the politics of empowerment. Boston: Unwin Hyman.(1998). Fighting words: Black women and the search for justice. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.(2000). Comment on Hekman's “Truth and method: Feminist standpoint theory revisited”: Where's the power? In C.Allen and J.Howard (Eds.), Provoking feminisms (pp. 43–49). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.(1985). Performing as a moral act: Ethical dimensions of the ethnography of performance. Literature in Performance, 5, 1–13. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10462938509391578(1988). Health theatre in a Hmong refugee camp: Performance, communication, and culture. Drama Review, 32, 174–208. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1145914(1991). Rethinking ethnography: Towards a critical cultural politics. Communication Monographs, 58, 179–194. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03637759109376222(1992). Ethnography, rhetoric, and performance. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 78, 80–97. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00335639209383982(1998). Beyond the text: Toward a performative cultural politics. In S.Dailey (Ed.), The future of performance studies: Visions and revisions (pp. 25–36). Annandale, VA: National Communication Association.(2002). Performance studies: Interventions and radical research. TDR: The Drama Review, 46, 145–156. http://dx.doi.org/10.1162/105420402320980550(1987). Survey research in the United States: Roots and emergence 1890–1960. Berkeley: University of California Press.(1993). George Herbert Mead: The making of a social pragmatist. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.(2002). A positive revolution in change: Appreciative inquiry. Retrieved December 5, 2002, from http://www.taosinstitute.net/coopwhitney1.doc, & (1999). The public journalism movement in America: Evangelists in the newsroom. Westport, CT: Praeger.(1990). Ethnic ethics: The restructuring of moral theory. Albany: State University of New York Press.(2001). Reclaiming the “indecorous” voice: Public participation by low-income communities in environmental decision-making. In C.Short & D.Hardy-Short (Eds.), Proceedings of the fifth biennial conference on communication and the environment (pp. 21–31). Flagstaff, AZ: Northern Arizona University, School of Communication.(1989). Communication as a practical discipline. In B.Dervin, L.Grossberg, B. J.O'Keefe, & E.Wartella (Eds.), Rethinking communication: Vol. 1. Paradigm issues (pp. 97–122). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.([Page 277]1990). On dialogue. In T.Maranhao (Ed.), The interpretation of dialogue (pp. 269–291). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.(1992). Hermes’ dilemma and Hamlet's desire: On the epistemology of interpretation. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.(Crenshaw, K., Gotanda, N., Peller, G., & Thomas, K. (Eds.). (1996). Critical race theory: The key writings that formed the movement. New York: New Press.2001). Practical theory, practical art, and the pragmatic-systemic account of inquiry. Communication Theory, 11, 14–35. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2885.2001.tb00231.x(1985). Toward an explanation of how the Milan method works: An invitation to a systemic epistemology and the evolution of family systems. In D.Campbell & R.Draper (Eds.), Applications of systemic family therapy: The Milan approach (pp. 69–86). London: Grune & Stratton., & (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. New York: Harper & Row.(1979). A critical reconstruction of Jürgen Habermas’ holistic approach to rhetoric as social philosophy. Journal of the American Forensic Association, 16, 128–137., & (1995). Constructing the self, constructing America. Reading, MA: Addison Wesley.(1997). Narrating the organization: Dramas of institutional identity. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.(2000). Dialogical rhetoric: An application of Martin Buber's philosophy of dialogue. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 86, 168–189. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00335630009384288(2000). A conversation with Maurice Friedman. Southern Communication Journal, 65, 243–254. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10417940009373170, & (1984). Introduction. In M.Theunissen, The other: Studies in the social ontology of Husserl, Heidegger, Sartre, and Buber (C.Macann, Trans.; pp. ix-xxi). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.(2001). Working through environmental conflict: The collaborative learning approach. London: Praeger., & (1976). Persons communicating. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall., & (1990). Journalism: All the news that fits we print. In The kiss of Lamourette: Reflections in cultural history (pp. 60–93). New York: Norton.(1996). Levinas: An introduction. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press.(1973a). An understanding of science and a hermeneutic science of understanding. Journal of Communication, 23, 139–159. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.1973.tb00939.x(1973b). Words without things: Toward a social phenomenology of language. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 59, 40–51. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00335637309383152(1978). Conceptualizing human understanding: Gadamer's hermeneutics and American communication studies. Communication Quarterly, 26, 12–23. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01463377809369288(1990). Reclaiming the subject matter as a guide to mutual understanding: Effectiveness and ethics in interpersonal interaction. Communication Quarterly, 38, 226–43. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01463379009369760(1992). Democracy in an age of corporate colonization: Developments in communication and the politics of everyday life. Albany: State University of New York Press.([Page 278]1995). Transforming communication, transforming business: Building responsive and responsible workplaces. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.(1998). Discursive formations, strategized subordination, and self-surveillance: An empirical case. In A.McKinlay & K.Starkey (Eds.), Foucault, management and organizational theory (pp. 151–172). London: Sage.(1983). Nietzsche and philosophy. London: Athlone Press.(1987). Dialogues. New York: Columbia University Press., & (Delgado, R., & Stefancic, J. (Eds.). (1997). Critical white studies: Looking behind the mirror. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.1979). Paulo Freire: The political dimensions of dialogic communication. Communication, 4, 133–155., & (1981). In the shadow of organization. Lawrence, KS: Regents Press.(2002). Interpretive interactionism ((2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.1973). Speech and phenomena (D. B.Allison & N.Garver, Trans.). Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.(1997). Of grammatology (G. C.Spivak, Trans.). Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.(1999). Adieu to Emmanuel Levinas (P. A.Brault & M.Naas, Trans.). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.(Dervin, B., Grossberg, L., O'Keefe, B. J., & Wartella, E. (Eds.). (1989). Rethinking communication: Vol. 1. Paradigm issues. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.1927). The public and its problems. New York: Henry Holt.(1944). Democracy and education. New York: The Free Press. (Original work published 1916)(DIA•logos. (2001). The approach. Retrieved March 22, 2002 from http://www.thinkingtogether.com/company.htmlDialogue Group. (2002). The Dialogue Group. Retrieved March 24, 2002, from http://www.thedialoguegrouponline.com/index.html2003, January 16). Fixed opinions, or the hinge of history. New York Review of Books, 50, 54–59.(1996). Perspectives on dialogue: Making talk developmental for individuals and organizations. Greensboro, NC: Center for Creative Leadership.(2001). Karaoke nights: An ethnographic rhapsody. Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira Press.(1982). The souls of black folk. New York: New American Library.(1997). Reading after Levinas. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.(1990). The New Journalism and the image-world. In N.Sims (Ed.), Literary journalism in the twentieth century (pp. 191–205). New York: Oxford University Press.(1990). Singular texts/Plural authors: Perspectives on collaborative writing. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press., & (1990). Jamming: Transcendence through organizing. Communication Research, 17, 139–164. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/009365090017002001(2001). Building a mystery: Toward a new theory of communication and identity. Journal of Communication, 51, 534–552. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2001.tb02895.x(1993). Organizational communication: Balancing creativity and constraint. New York: St. Martin's Press., & , Jr. ([Page 279]2001). Organizational communication: Balancing creativity and constraint (, & , Jr. (3rd ed.). New York: Bedford/St. Martin's.1944). Four quartets. London: Faber and Faber.(1998). Dialogue: Rediscover the transforming power of conversation. New York: Wiley., & (1972). The making of a television series: A case study in the sociology of culture. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.(Ellis, C., & Bochner, A. (Eds.). (1996). Composing ethnography: Alternative forms of qualitative writing. Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira Press.1964). The technological society (J.Wilkinson, Trans.). New York: Anchor.(1985). The humiliation of the word (J. M.Hanks, Trans.). Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans.(1997). The first hundred years of Mikhail Bakhtin. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.(1989). Negotiating control: A study of news sources. Toronto: University of Toronto Press., , & (1998). Custodians of conscience: Investigative journalism and public virtue. New York: Columbia University Press., & (1993). The spirit of community: Rights, responsibilities, and the communitarian agenda. New York: Crown.(1992). Free spaces: The sources of democratic change in America (, & (Rev. ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.1979). Habermas on argumentation theory: Some emerging topics. Journal of the American Forensic Association, 16, 77–82.(1983). Aspects of coherence in conversation and rhetoric. In R. T.Craig & K.Tracy (Eds.), Conversational coherence: Form, structure, and strategy (pp. 259–284). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.(2000). Walter Ong's contributions to cultural studies: The phenomenology of the word and I-Thou communication. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.(1971). Hollywood studio musicians: Their work and careers in the recording industry. Chicago: Aldine.(Ferguson, M., & Golding, P. (Eds.). (1997). Cultural studies in question. London: Sage.1988). The end of conversation: The impact of mass media on modern society. New York: Greenwood.(1978). Perspectives on human communication. New York: Macmillan.(1998). Wonder, the rainbow, and the aesthetics of rare experiences. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.(1987). Human communication as narration: Toward a philosophy of reason, value, and action. Columbia: University of South Carolina Press.(1991). Democracy and deliberation: New directions for democratic reform. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.(1992). The dialogue of justice: Toward a self-reflective society. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.(1980). Manufacturing the news. Austin: University of Texas Press.(1987). Television culture. London: Methuen.(1989a). Reading the popular. Boston: Unwin Hyman.(1989b). Understanding popular culture. Boston: Unwin Hyman.([Page 280]1962). Moral responsibility: Situational ethics at work. Philadelphia: Westminster Press.(1989). Howard's End. New York: Vintage Books.(1993). Fires in the mirror[Video]. New York: PBS Video.(Producer), & (1991). Women speak: The eloquence of women's lives. Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland., & (1970). The order of things: An archaeology of the human sciences. New York: Random House.(1977). Language, counter-memory, practice: Selected essays and interviews (D.Bouchard, Ed.). Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.(2001). Fearless speech (J.Pearson, Ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Semiotext(e).(1986). The implications of Habermas's theory of legitimation for rhetorical criticism. Communication Monographs, 53, 16–35. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03637758609376123(1974). Man's search for meaning: An introduction to logotherapy (I.Lasch, Trans.). New York: Pocket Books.(1989). Unruly practices: Power, discourse, and gender in contemporary social theory. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.(1992). Rethinking the public sphere: A contribution to the critique of actually existing democracy. In C.Calhoun (Ed.), Habermas and the public sphere (pp. 109–142). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.(2000). Recognition without ethics. In M.Garber, B.Hanssen, & R. L.Walkowitz (Eds.), The turn to ethics (pp. 95–126). New York: Routledge.(1990). Pedagogy of the oppressed (M. B.Ramos, Trans.). New York: Continuum.(1998). Pedagogy of freedom: Ethics, democracy, and civic courage. New York: Rowman & Littlefield.(1955). Martin Buber: The life of dialogue. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.4324/9780203398197(1965). Introductory essay. In M.Buber, The knowledge of man: Selected essays (M.Friedman, Ed.; M.Friedman & R. G.Smith, Trans.; pp. 1–48). New York: Harper.(1974). Touchstones of reality: Existential trust and the community of peace. New York: E. P. Dutton.(1981). Martin Buber's life and work: The early years 1878–1923. New York: E. P. Dutton.(1982). The human way: A dialogic approach to religion and human experience. Chambersburg, PA: Anima.(1983a). The confirmation of otherness: In family, community, and society. New York: Pilgrim Press.(1983b). Martin Buber's life and work: The later years 1945–1965. New York: E. P. Dutton.(1983c). Martin Buber's life and work: The middle years 1923–1945. New York: E. P. Dutton.(1985). The healing dialogue in psychotherapy. New York: Jason Aronson.(1986). Carl Rogers and Martin Buber: Self-actualization and dialogue. Person-Centered Review, 1, 409–435.([Page 281]1992). Dialogue and the human image: Beyond humanistic psychology. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.(Friedman, M. (Ed.). (1996). Martin Buber and the human sciences. Albany: State University of New York Press.2001). Martin Buber and Mikhail Bakhtin: The dialogue of voices and the word that is spoken. Religion and Literature, 33, 25–36.(1978). Interpersonal communication: Innovations in instruction. Washington, DC: National Education Association.(1975). Truth and method (G.Barden & J.Cummings, Eds. & Trans.). New York: Seabury Press.(1976). Philosophical hermeneutics (D. E.Linge, Ed. & Trans.). Berkeley: University of California Press.(1980). Dialogue and dialectic: Eight hermeneutical studies on Plato (P. C.Smith, Trans.). New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.(1982). Truth and method ((2nd ed.; G.Barden & J.Cumming, Trans.). New York: Crossroad.1985). Philosophical apprenticeships (R. R.Sullivan, Trans.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.(1989a). Text and interpretation (D. J.Schmidt & R.Palmer, Trans.). In D. P.Michelfelder & R. E.Palmer (Eds.), Dialogue and deconstruction: The Gadamer-Derrida encounter (pp. 21–51). Albany: State University of New York Press.(1989b). Truth and method (2nd Rev. ed.; J.Weinsheimer & D. G.Marshall, Trans.). New York: Crossroad.(1997). Reflections on my philosophical journey. In L. E.Hahn (Ed.), The philosophy of Hans-Georg Gadamer (pp. 555–602). Chicago, IL: Open Court.(1979). Deciding what's news: A study of CBS Evening News, NBC Nightly News, Newsweek, and Time. New York: Pantheon.(1992). The dialogics of critique: M. M. Bakhtin and the theory of ideology. New York: Routledge.(1967). Studies in ethnomethodology. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.(1990). Capitalism and communication: Global culture and the economics of information. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.(2000). Emancipation, the media, and modernity: Arguments about the media and social theory. New York: Oxford University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198742258.001.0001(1990). The master's pieces: On canon formation and the African-American tradition. South Atlantic Quarterly, 89, 89–111., Jr. (1979). From the native's point of view: On the nature of anthropological understanding. In P.Rabinow & W. M.Sullivan (Eds.), Interpretive social science: A reader (pp. 225–242). Berkeley: University of California Press.(1983). Local knowledge. New York: Basic Books.(1991). The saturated self. New York: Basic Books.(1994). Realities and relationships: Soundings in social construction. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.(1999). An invitation to social construction. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.(2001). Toward a vocabulary of transformative dialogue. International Journal of Public Administration, 24, 697–707. Retrieved November 26, 2002, from http://www.swarthmore.edu/SocSci/kgergen1/web/page.phtml?id=manu23&st=manuscripts&hf=1http://dx.doi.org/10.1081/PAD-100104770, , & ([Page 282]1961). Defensive communication. Journal of Communication, 11, 141–148. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.1961.tb00344.x(1999, December 20). The Columbine tapes. Time, 40–51., & (1989). The orthodox consensus and the emerging synthesis. In B.Dervin, L.Grossberg, B. J.O'Keefe, & E.Wartella (Eds.), Rethinking communication: Vol. 1. Paradigm issues (pp. 53–65). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.(1970). Fundamentals of interpersonal communication. New York: Harper & Row., & (1983). Inside prime time. New York: Pantheon.(1982). Rhetorical criticism of interpersonal discourse: An exploratory study. Communication Quarterly, 30, 353–358. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01463378209369471, & (1999a). The idea of public journalism. In T. L.Glasser (Ed.), The idea of public journalism (pp. 3–18). New York: Guilford.(Glasser, T. L. (Ed.). (1999b). The idea of public journalism. New York: Guilford.1991). Rights talk: The impoverishment of political discourse. New York: Macmillan.(1959). The presentation of self in everyday life. New York: Anchor.(1967). Interaction ritual. Garden City, NY: Anchor.(1971). The rhetoric of black Americans. Columbus, OH: Merrill., & (1996). Constituting relationships in talk: A taxonomy of speech events in social and personal relationships. Human Communication Research, 23, 87–114. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.1996.tb00388.x, & (1991). Living in the rock n roll mystery: Reading context, self, and others as clues. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press., Jr. (1993). Mysteries of the future told: Communication as the material manifestation of spirituality. World Communication Journal, 22, 40–49., Jr. (1994). Casing a promised land: The autobiography of an organizational detective as cultural ethnographer. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press., Jr. (1996). Divine signs: Connecting spirit to community. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press., Jr. (2000). Writing the new ethnography. Walnut Creek CA: AltaMira., Jr. (1982). The personal, technical, and public spheres of argument: A speculative inquiry into the art of public deliberation. Journal of the American Forensic Association, 18, 214–227.(1988). The other Martin Buber: Recollections of his contemporaries. Columbus: Ohio University Press.(1999). Ethics as reciprocity: An analysis of Levinas's reading of Buber. International Studies in Philosophy, 31, 91–109. http://dx.doi.org/10.5840/intstudphil199931217(1999). The power of metaphor in the age of electronic media. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.(1984). Symbolic inducement and knowing: A study in the foundations of rhetoric. Columbia: University of South Carolina Press.(1995). The recovery of race in America. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.(Gronbeck, B. E., Farrell, T. J., & Soukup, P. A. (Eds.). (1991). Media, consciousness, and culture: Explorations of Walter Ong's thought. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.[Page 283]1992). We gotta get out of this place: Popular conservatism and postmodern culture. London: Routledge.(Grossberg, L. C., Nelson, C., & Treichler, P. A. (Eds.). (1992). Cultural studies. New York: Routledge.1996). On dialogue: An essay in free thought. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.(1994). Tyranny of the majority: Fundamental fairness in representative democracy. New York: Macmillan.(1996). Democracy as theater. Columbia Journalism Review, 34, 4.(1998). Lift every voice: Turning a civil rights setback into a new vision of social justice. New York: Simon & Schuster.(1996). Democracy and disagreement. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press., & (1971). Knowledge and human interests (J. J.Shapiro, Trans.). Boston: Beacon Press.(1975). Legitimation crisis (T.McCarthy, Trans.). Boston: Beacon Press.(1979). Communication and the evolution of society (T.McCarthy, Trans.). Boston: Beacon Press.(1980). Discourse ethics: Notes on philosophical justification; Moral consciousness and communicative action (C.Lenhart & S.Weber Nicholson, Trans.). Cambridge: MIT Press.(1984). The theory of communicative action: Vol. 1. Reason and the rationalization of society (T.McCarthy, Trans.). Boston: Beacon Press.(1987). The theory of communicative action: Vol. 2. Life world and system: A critique of functionalist reason (T.McCarthy, Trans.). Boston: Beacon Press.(1989). The structural transformation of the public sphere. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.(1990). Moral consciousness and communicative action (C.Lenhardt & S. W.Nicholsen, Trans.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.(1992). Autonomy and solidarity: Interviews with Jürgen Habermas (Rev. ed.; P.Dews, Ed.). London: Verso.(1993). Justification and application: Remarks on discourse ethics (C. P.Cronin, Trans.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.(1998). On the pragmatics of communication (M.Cooke, Ed.). Cambridge: MIT Press.(1981). Speech and law in a free society. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.(1963). Strategies of psychotherapy. New York: Grune & Stratton. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/14324-000(1969). The power tactics of Jesus Christ and other essays. New York: Avon.(1973). Uncommon therapy: The psychiatric techniques of Milton H. Erickson, M.D. New York: Norton.(1989). Ideology and communication theory. In B.Dervin, L.Grossberg, B. J.O'Keefe, & E.Wartella (Eds.), Rethinking communication: Vol. 1. Paradigm issues (pp. 40–52). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.(1989). Language, context, and text: Aspects of language in a social-semiotic perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press., & (1985). The American news media: A critical theory perspective. In J.Forester (Ed.), Critical theory and public life (pp. 122–146). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.([Page 284]2003). The problematics of dialogue and power. Communication Yearbook, 27, 125–157. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15567419cy2701_5, , & (Hand, S. (Ed.). (1989). The Levinas reader. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.2000). Ethics of the other. In M.Garber, B.Hanssen, & R. L.Walkowitz (Eds.), The turn to ethics (pp. 127–179). New York: Routledge.(1988). Situated knowledges: The science question in feminism and the privilege of partial perspective. Signs, 14, 575–599.(1991). Whose science? Whose knowledge? Thinking from women's lives. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.(1992). Rethinking standpoint epistemology: What is “strong objectivity?”Centennial Review, 36, 437–470.(1998). Is science multicultural?Bloomington: University of Indiana Press.(1992). Critical communication studies: Communication, history, and theory in America. London: Routledge. http://dx.doi.org/10.4324/9780203312506(1972). Rhetorical sensitivity and social interaction. Speech Monographs, 39, 75–91. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03637757209375742, & (1983). The feminist standpoint: Developing the ground for a specifically feminist historical materialism. In S.Harding & M. B.Hintikka (Eds.), Discovering reality (pp. 283–310). Boston: Ridel.(1998). The feminist standpoint revisited and other essays. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.(2001). Not just “hot air”: Talk of personal experience on news talk radio as collaborative and critical engagement in the public sphere. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ.(1977). Toward a hermeneutic phenomenology of communication. Communication Quarterly, 25, 30–41. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01463377709369261(1998). Becoming other-wise: Conversational performance and the politics of experience. Text and Performance Quarterly, 18, 273–299. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10462939809366233(1999). The dialogics of conversation: Power, control, vulnerability. Communication Theory, 9, 229–264. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2885.1999.tb00170.x(1995). Issues in Freirean pedagogy. Retrieved October 3, 2002, from http://nlu.nl.edu/ace/Resources/Documents/FreireIssues.html(1949). Existence and being (D.Scott, R. F. C.Hull, & A.Crick, Trans.). South Bend, IN: Henry Regnery.(1959). An introduction to metaphysics (R.Mannheim, Trans.). New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.(1962). Being and time (J.Macquarrie & E.Robinson, Trans.). New York: Harper & Row.(1966). Discourse on thinking (J. M.Anderson & E.Hans Freud, Trans.). New York: Harper & Row.(1968). What is called thinking? (J. G.Gray, Trans.). New York: Harper & Row.(1969). Identity and difference (J.Stambaugh, Trans.). New York: Harper & Row.(1971a). On the way to language (P. D.Hertz, Trans.). New York: Harper & Row.(1971b). Poetry, language, thought (A.Hofstadter, Trans.). New York: Harper & Row.([Page 285]1972). On time and being (J.Stambaugh, Trans.). New York: Harper & Row.(1977). Letter on humanism (F. A.Capuzzi & J. G.Gray, Trans.). In D. F.Krell (Ed.), Basic writings (pp. 193–242). New York: Harper & Row.(1993). Basic concepts (G. E.Aylesworth, Trans.). Bloomington: Indiana University Press.(2002). Access, dialogue, deliberation: Experimenting with three concepts of journalism criticism. Retrieved March 3, 2003, from The International Media and Democracy Project Web site, http://www.imdp.org/artman/publish/article_27.shtml, & (1955). Catch-22. New York: Dell.(1988). Manufacturing consent: The political economy of the mass media. New York: Pantheon., & (1951). Man is not alone: A philosophy of religion. New York: Noonday Press.(1960). Aku-Aku: The secret of Easter Island. New York: Pocket Books.(1988). Cultural mediums: The work world of “creatives” in American advertising agencies. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Columbia University, New York.(1992). Is dialogism for real?Social Text, 10, 102–113. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/466470(1999). Mikhail Bakhtin: An aesthetics for democracy. New York: Oxford University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198159612.001.0001(1989). The Hite report. New York: Dell.(2002). Monstrous youth in suburbia: Disruption and recovery of the American dream. Southern Communication Journal, 67, 259–275. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10417940209373235(1981). Glossary. In M. M.Bakhtin, The dialogic imagination: Four essays by M. M. Bakhtin (M.Holquist, Ed.; C.Emerson & M.Holquist, Trans.; pp. 423–434). Austin: University of Texas Press.(1986). Introduction. In M. M.Bakhtin, Speech genres and other late essays (C.Emerson & M.Holquist, Eds.; V. W.McGee, Trans.; pp. ix-xxiii). Austin: University of Texas Press.(1990). Dialogism: Bakhtin and his world. New York: Routledge. http://dx.doi.org/10.4324/9780203330340(Homer. (1996). Odyssey (R.Fagles, Trans.). New York: Penguin Books.1996). The struggle for recognition: The moral grammar of social conflicts (J.Anderson, Trans.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.(1994). Teaching to transgress: Education as the practice of freedom. New York: Routledge.(1991). Breaking bread: Insurgent Black intellectual life. Boston: South End Press., & (1989). The rhetoric of heteroglossia in Flannery O'Connor'sWise Blood. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 75, 198–211. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00335638909383872(1990). We make the road by walking: Conversations on education and social change (B.Bell, J.Gaventa, & J.Peters, Eds.). Philadelphia: Temple University Press., & (1963). The miracle of dialogue. New York: Seabury Press.(1962). Ideas: General introduction to pure phenomenology (W. R. B.Gibson, Trans.). New York: Collier.(1991). Between person and person: Toward a dialogical psychotherapy. Highland, NY: The Gestalt Journal Press.([Page 286]1993). Medicine, rhetoric, and the euthanasia debate: A case study in the workings of postmodern discourse. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 79, 347–363. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00335639309384029(1994). The call of conscience: Heidegger and the question of rhetoric. Philosophy and Rhetoric, 27, 374–396.(2001a). The call of conscience: Heidegger and Levinas, rhetoric and the euthanasia debate. Columbia: University of South Carolina Press.(2001b). Defining “human dignity” in the debate over the (im)morality of physician-assisted suicide. Journal of Medical Humanities, 22, 69–82. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1026690128326(2001c). Hermeneutics. In T. O.Sloane (Ed.), Encyclopedia of rhetoric (pp. 329–337). New York: Oxford University Press.(2002a). The interruptive nature of the call of conscience: Rethinking Heidegger on the question of rhetoric. In M. B.Matustik & W. L.McBride (Eds.), Calvin O. Schrag and the task of philosophy after postmodernity (pp. 253–269). Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.(2002b, July). The rhetoric of social death: The controversy over the flying of the confederate battle flag in South Carolina. Paper presented at the Fifth Conference of the International Society for the Study of Argumentation, Amsterdam, Netherlands.(The gift of acknowledgment. In R. E.Ramsey (Ed.), Experiences between philosophy and communication: Engaging the philosophical contributions of Calvin O. Schrag. Albany: State University of New York Press.(in press-a).Rhetorically, we dwell. In M. J.Hyde (Ed.), The ethos of rhetoric. Columbia: University of South Carolina Press.(in press-b).2000). The call of conscience, rhetorical interruptions, and the euthanasia debate. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 28, 1–23. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00909880009365551, & (1979). Hermeneutics and rhetoric: A seen but unobserved relationship. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 65, 347–363. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00335637909383487, & (1968). Why Plato wrote dialogues. Philosophy and Rhetoric, 1, 38–50.(Institute on the arts and civic dialogue: Project goals. (1998, November 30). Retrieved October 28, 1999 from http://arts-civic.org/goals.html1993). Taking flight: Dialogue, collective thinking, and organizational learning. Organizational Dynamics, 22, 24–39. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0090-2616%2893%2990051-2(1999). Dialogue and the art of thinking together: A pioneering approach to communicating in business and in life. New York: Doubleday.(1988). Moral mazes: The world of corporate managers. New York: Oxford University Press.(1998). Whiteness of a different color: European immigrants and the alchemy of race. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.(1902). The varieties of religious experience. New York: Longman, Green.(1975). Pragmatism: A new name for some old ways of thinking; and, the meaning of truth. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.(1983). Power and knowledge: Toward a new critical synthesis. Journal of Communication, 33(3), 342–354. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.1983.tb02434.x(1993). Force fields: Between intellectual history and cultural critique. New York: Routledge.(1990). Redeeming modernity: Contradictions in media criticism. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.([Page 287]1997). Imagining the audience: Losses and gains in cultural studies. In M.Ferguson & P.Golding (Eds.), Cultural studies in question (pp. 155–169). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage., & (1971). The emerging concept of communication as dialogue. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 57, 373–382. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00335637109383082(1975). Ethics in human communication. Columbus, OH: Charles E. Merrill.(2000). Nel Noddings's uses of Martin Buber's philosophy of dialogue. Southern Communication Journal, 65, 151–160. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10417940009373164(1995). Spreading the news: The American postal system from Franklin to Morse. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.(1993). Wittgenstein: Rethinking the inner. London: Routledge.(1978). Validity and rhetoric in philosophical argument: An outlook in transition. University Park, PA: The Dialogue Press., Jr. (Jones, S. G. (Ed.). (1995). CyberSociety: Computer-mediated communication and community. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Jones, S. G. (Ed.). (1997). Virtual culture: Identity and communication in cybersociety. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781446250303Jones, S. G. (Ed.). (1998). CyberSociety 2.0: Revisiting computer-mediated communication and community. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/97814522436891997). Rhetoric and hermeneutics: Places along the way. In W.Jost & M. J.Hyde (Eds.), Rhetoric and hermeneutics in our time (pp. 1–42). New Haven, CT: Yale University Press., & (1971). The transparent self. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.(1998). Music, the brain & ecstasy: How music captures our imagination. New York: Avon.(1990). Bakhtin's body politic: A phenomenological dialogics. Man and World: An International Philosophical Review, 23, 85–99. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF01248455(2000). Civic dialogue in the 1996 presidential campaign: Candidate, media, and public voices. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press., , & (1994). The life of dialogue. In R.Anderson, K. N.Cissna, & R. C.Arnett (Eds.), The reach of dialogue: Confirmation, voice, and community (pp. 34–46). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.(2000). A council of elders: Creating a community of care. Social Science and Medicine, 50, 851–860. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0277-9536%2899%2900341-X, , , , & (2002). The Heyerdahl solution: Remaking social work practice. Unpublished manuscript, University of Sunderland, Sunderland, UK.(1993). Lifework of David Bohm: River of truth. Retrieved August 27, 2002, from the Satyana Institute Web site, http://www.satyana.org/thml/bohm.html(2001). How the way we talk can change the way we work. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass., & (1985). Reflections on gender and science. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.(1981). Interpersonal dissent and the ethics of dialogue. Communication, 6, 287–304.(1968). An interpersonal ethic for communication. Journal of Communication, 18, 73–81. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.1968.tb00057.x, & ([Page 288]1993). Communication in accounts of religious conversion: An interpretive phenomenological account. Journal of Communication and Religion, 16, 71–81.(1999). Dialogue and dialectics in managing organizational change: The case of a mission-based transformation. Southern Communication Journal, 64, 211–231. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10417949909373135(2001). Managing conflict in a negotiated world: A narrative approach to achieving dialogue and change. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781452233246, & (1999). The death of discourse in our own chatroom: “Sextext,” skillful discussion, and virtual communities. In D. S.Slayden & R. K.Whillock (Eds.), Soundbite culture: The death of discourse in a wired world (pp. 155–190). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage., & , Jr. (Kelley, H. H., Berscheid, E., Christensen, A., Harvey, J. H., Huston, T. L., Levinger, G., et al. (Eds.). (1983). Close relationships. New York: Freeman.1995). Media culture: Cultural studies, identity and politics between the modern and the postmodern. London: Routledge. http://dx.doi.org/10.4324/9780203205808(1995). Reciprocity and the height of God: A defense of Buber against Levinas. Sophia, 34, 65–73. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02772448(1970). Interpersonal speech-communication: Elements and structures. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.(1992). The text as thou: Martin Buber's dialogical hermeneutics and narrative theology. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.(1968). Report of the national advisory commission on civil disorders. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.(1989). News in the mail: The press, post office, and public information, 1700–1860s. New York: Greenwood Press.(1999). Provocations: Spiritual writings of Kierkegaard (C. E.Moore, Ed.). Farmington, PA: The Plough Publishing House of The Bruderhof Foundation.(1989). Before the story: Interviewing and communication skills for journalists. New York: St. Martin's Press., & (1995). A civil tongue: Justice, dialogue, and the politics of pluralism. University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press.(2001). Queer theory and social change (opening out). New York: Routledge.(1979). On becoming Carl Rogers. New York: Delacorte Press.(Kirschenbaum, H., & Henderson, V. L. (Eds.). (1989a). Carl Rogers: Dialogues—Conversations with Martin Buber, Paul Tillich, B. F. Skinner, Gregory Bateson, Michael Polanyi, Rollo May, and others. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Kirschenbaum, H., & Henderson, V. L. (Eds.). (1989b). The Carl Rogers reader. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.1979). Toward a contemporary linguistic interpretation of the concept of stasis. Journal of the American Forensic Association, 16, 95–103.(1993). Communities of commitment: The heart of learning organizations. Organizational Dynamics, 22, 5–22. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0090-2616%2893%2990050-B, & (1996). The power of dialogue: Critical hermeneutics after Gadamer and Foucault. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.(1989). On the ethics of constructing communication. In B.Dervin, L.Grossberg, B. J.O'Keefe, & E.Wartella (Eds.), Rethinking communication: Vol. 1. Paradigm issues (pp. 66–96). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.([Page 289]1977). Therapeutic discourse: Psychotherapy as conversation. New York: Academic Press., & (1969). Self and others ((2nd ed.). New York: Penguin.1977). Speech act phenomenology. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-1045-0(1984). Semiotic phenomenology of rhetoric. Washington, DC: University Press of America.(1988). Phenomenology of communication: Merleau-Ponty's thematics in communicology and semiology. Pittsburgh, PA: Duquesne University Press.(1979). The culture of narcissism: American life in a time of diminishing expectations. New York: W. W. Norton.(1987). Science in action: How to follow scientists and engineers through society. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.(1999). Politiques de la nature: Comment faire entrer les sciences en democratie [The politics of nature: How to introduce the sciences into democracy]. Paris: Editions la Decouverte.(1986). Laboratory life: The construction of scientific facts. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press., & (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511815355, & (1976). Love and justice: Levinas’ reading of Buber. Philosophy Today, 20, 77–83.(1999, August 22). The outsiders: How the picked-on cope—or don't. The New York Times Magazine, 36–41.(1993). From legal scholar to quota queen: What happens when politics pulls the press into the groves of academe?Columbia Journalism Review, 32, 36–41.(1996). Jews & Blacks: Let the healing begin. New York: Grosset/Putnam., & (1969). Totality and infinity: An essay on exteriority (A.Lingis, Trans.). Pittsburgh, PA: Duquesne University Press.(1978). Existence and existents (A.Lingis, Trans.). The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff.(1981). Otherwise than being or beyond essence (A.Lingis, Trans.). Hague: Martinus Nijhoff.(1983). Beyond intentionality (K.McLaughlin, Trans.). In A.Montefiore (Ed.), Philosophy in France today (pp. 100–115). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.(1984a). Ethics of the infinite. In R.Kearney (Ed.), Dialogues with Contemporary continental thinkers: The phenomenological heritage (pp. 49–70). Manchester, UK: Manchester University Press.(1984b). Martin Buber, Gabriel Marcel, and philosophy. In H.Gordon & J.Bloch (Eds.), Martin Buber: A centenary volume (pp. 305–321). New York: KTAV.(1985). Ethics and infinity: Conversations with Phillipe Nemo (R.Cohen, Trans.). Pittsburgh, PA: Duquesne University Press.(1987a). Collected philosophical papers (A.Lingis, Trans.). The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-4364-3(1987b). Outside the subject. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.(1987c). Time and the other (R.Cohen, Trans.). Pittsburgh, PA: Duquesne University Press.([Page 290]1991). Otherwise than being or beyond essence (A.Lingis, Trans.). Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Kluwer. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-94-015-7906-3(1996). Proper names (M. B.Smith, Trans.). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.(1998). Of God who comes to mind (B.Bergo, Trans.). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.(1999). Alterity & transcendence (M. B.Smith, Trans.). New York: Columbia University Press.(1926). How natives think (L. A.Clare, Trans.). London: George Allen and Unwin.(2001). [Diversity, ethics, and the other: Articulating philosophical perspectives for communication studies]. Presentation at the annual meeting of the National Communication Association, Atlanta, GA.(November,1969). Of human interaction. Palo Alto, CA: National Press.(2000). Absolute difference and social ontology: Levinas face to face with Buber and Fichte. Human Studies, 23, 227–241. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1005628507987(1993). Reading National Geographic. Chicago: University of Chicago Press., & (1977). Semantics (Vol. 2). Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.(1984). The postmodern condition: A report on knowledge (G.Bennington & B.Massumi, Trans.). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.(1998). A short history of ethics: A history of moral philosophy from the Homeric age to the twentieth century ((2nd ed.). Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press.1999). Performing theory/embodied writing. Text and Performance Quarterly, 19, 107–124. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10462939909366254(Critical ethnography: Performance, protest, and the meaning of home. In N.Denzin & Y.Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research ((in press).3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.1972). The rhetorical dialogue: Contemporary concepts and cases. Dubuque, IA: William C. Brown., & (2001, November). An analysis of audience influence on the hooks-West dialogue. Paper presented at the National Communication Association convention, Atlanta, GA.(1993). Interpreting otherwise than Heidegger: Emmanuel Levinas's ethics as first philosophy. Pittsburgh, PA: Duquesne University Press.(1980). Beyond adversary democracy. New York: Basic Books.(1986). Therapeutic discourse and Socratic dialogue: A cultural critique. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.(Maranhao, T. (Ed.). (1990). The interpretation of dialogue. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Marcus, G. E. (Ed.). (1996). Connected: Engagements with media. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.1986). Anthropology as cultural critique: An experimental moment in the human sciences. Chicago: University of Chicago Press., & (1998). Life online: Researching real experiences in virtual space. Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira Press.([Page 291]Markova, I., & Foppa, K. (Eds.). (1990). The dynamics of dialogue. New York: Springer-Verlag.MartinBuber and CarlRogers [dialogue] (K.Cissna & R.Anderson, Transcribers & Eds.). (1999). In J. B.Agassi (Ed.), Martin Buber on psychology and psychotherapy: Essays, letters, and dialogue (pp. 246–270). Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press.1961). Peak-experiences as acute identity experiences. American Journal of Psychoanalysis, 121, 254–260. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF01873126(1962). Lessons from the peak-experiences. Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 2, 9–18. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/002216786200200205(1964). Religions, values, and peak experiences. Columbus: Ohio State University Press.(1968a). Music education and peak-experiences. Music Educators Journal, 54, 163–171. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3391274(1968b). The farther reaches of human nature. Journal of Transpersonal Psychology, 1, 1–9.(1970). Motivation and personality ((2nd ed.). New York: Harper & Row.1973). The farther reaches of human nature. New York: Viking Press.(1976). Religions, values and peak-experiences. New York: Penguin Books.(1994). Politics for people: Finding a responsible public voice. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.(Matson, F., & Montagu, A. (Eds.). (1967). The human dialogue: Perspectives on communication. New York: Free Press.1990). Emociones y lenguaje en educacion y politica [Emotions and language in education and politics]. Santiago, Chile: Dolmen Ediciones.(1997). La objetividad: Un argumento para obligar [Objectivity: A compelling argument]. Santiago, Chile: Dolcen Ediciones.(1980). Autopoiesis: The organization of the living. In H. R.Maturana & F. J.Varela (Eds.), Autopoiesis and cognition: The realization of the living (pp. 59–140). Boston: D. Reidel. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-8947-4, & (2001). Jürgen Habermas: A philosophical-political profile. New York: Rowman & Littlefield.(1996). The socially responsive self: Social theory and professional ethics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.(1979). Translator's introduction. In J.Habermas, Communication and the evolution of society (pp. vii-xxiv). Boston: Beacon.(1993). Telecommunications, mass media, and democracy: The battle for the control of U.S. broadcasting, 1928–1935. New York: Oxford University Press.(1999). Rich media, poor democracy: Communication politics in dubious times. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.(2002). Our media, not theirs: The democratic struggle against corporate media. New York: Seven Stories., & (1987). An emerging critical rhetoric: Hellmut Geissner's Sprechwissenschaft. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 73, 349–400. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00335638709383813, & (1993). Food of the gods: A search for the original tree of knowledge. New York: Bantam.(1957). Communication, truth and society. Ethics, 67, 89–99. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/291096([Page 292]1951). The mechanical bride: Folklore of industrial man. New York: Vanguard Press.(1962). The Gutenberg galaxy: The making of typographic man. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.(1964). Understanding media: The extensions of man. New York: New American Library.(2000). Technological innovation and change: A case study in the formation of organizational conscience. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 86, 19–47. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00335630009384277, & (2002a). The social construction of disorders: From pathology to potential. In J. D.Raskin & S. K.Bridges (Eds.), Studies in meaning: Exploring constructivist psychology (pp. 143–168). New York: Pace University Press.(2002b). Appreciative inquiry: Social construction in practice. In C.Dalsgaard, T.Meisner, & K.Voetmann (Eds.), A symphony of appreciation: Development and renewal in organisations through working with appreciative inquiry (pp. 110–129). Copenhagen: Danish Psychology Press.(1999). Relational responsibility: Resources for sustainable dialogue. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781452243733, & (1994). The rhetoric of racism. Lanham, MD: University Press of America.(1996). Zen in the art of rhetoric: An inquiry into coherence. Albany: State University of New York Press.(1998a). From complicity to coherence: Rereading the rhetoric of Afrocentricity. Western Journal of Communication, 62, 114–140. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10570319809374602(1998b). Passionate intensity: Louis Farrakhan and the fallacies of racial reasoning. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 84, 416–429. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00335639809384230(2002). The rhetoric of racism revisited: Reparations or separation?Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.(1971). A rap on race. Philadelphia: Lippincott., & (1981). Silent messages: Implicit communication of emotions and attitudes ((2nd ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.2001). The metaphysical club: A story of ideas in America. New York: Farrar, Straus, and Giroux.(1968). The visible and the invisible. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.(1985). No sense of place: The impact of electronic media on social behavior. New York: Oxford University Press.(1994). Medium theory. In D. T.Crowley & D.Mitchell (Eds.), Communiction theory today (pp. 50–77). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.(1997). Tune your brain: Using music to manage your mind, body, and mood. New York: Berkeley Publishing Group.(2000). More than just talk: The use of racial dialogues to combat racism. Social Work with Groups, 23, 31–53. http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/J009v23n01_03, & (1940). Situated actions and vocabularies of motive. American Sociological Review, 5, 439–452.(1995). Sitting in the fire. Portland, OR: Lao Tze Press.(1980). Towards an appropriate social theory for applied systems thinking: Critical theory and soft systems methodology. Journal of Applied Systems Analysis, 7, 41–49.([Page 293]1991). A feminist frame for the oral history interview. In S.Gluck & D.Patai (Eds.), Women's words: The feminist practice of oral history (pp. 27–41). New York: Routledge.(1986). Research interviewing: Context and narrative. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.(Montgomery, B. M., & Baxter, L. A. (Eds.). (1998a). Dialectical approaches to studying personal relationships. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.1998b). Dialogism and relational dialectics. In B. M.Montgomery & L. A.Baxter (Eds.), Dialectical approaches to studying personal relationships (pp. 155–183). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum., & (1990). Mikhail Bakhtin: Creation of a prosaics. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press., & (2000). The democratic paradox. London: Verso.(1990). On being in the world: Wittgenstein and Heidegger on seeing aspects. London: Routledge.(1952). Art and technics. New York: Columbia University Press.(1983). Qualitative methodology, theory and application: A guide for the social practitioner. Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt., & (1975). Organization and ecstasy: Deliberate and accidental communitas among Huichol Indians and American youth. In S.Moore & B.Myerhoff (Eds.), Symbol and politics in communal ideology (pp. 33–67). Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.(1998). Intersections of eros and ethnography. Text and Performance Quarterly, 18, 1–21. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10462939809366206(1994). Violence against the press: Policing the public sphere in U.S. history. New York: Oxford University Press.(Nerone, J. (Ed.). (1995). Last rights: Revisiting Four Theories of the Press. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.1984). On the dialogic aspects of mass communication. Critical Studies in Mass Communication, 1, 34–50. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15295038409360012(1953). An approach to the study of communicative acts. Psychological Review, 60, 393–404. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0063098(1990). Crazy wisdom. Berkeley, CA: Ten Speed Press.(1984). Caring: A feminine approach to ethics and moral education. Berkeley: University of California Press.(2001). People of Cincinnati protest against police murders. Flame. Retrieved June 18, 2003, from http://www.fantompowa.net/Flame/cincinnati.htm(2002). Time for a new Black power movement. Guardian Unlimited. Retrieved August 30, 2002, from http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,12271,776439,00.html(1973). Communication and culture in ancient India and China. Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press.(1958). Ramus, method, and the decay of dialogue. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.(1967). The presence of the word: Some prolegomena for cultural and religious history. New York: Simon & Schuster.(1977). Interfaces of the word: Studies in the evolution of consciousness and culture. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.([Page 294]1982). Orality and literacy: The technologizing of the word. London: Methuen. http://dx.doi.org/10.4324/9780203328064(1993). Martin Heidegger: A political life. San Francisco: Basic Books.(1983). To know as we are known. New York: HarperCollins.(1998). The courage to teach. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.(1986). Voices: Bakhtin's heteroglossia and polyphony, and the performance of narrative literature. Literature in Performance, 7, 1–12. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10462938609391621(1974). Interpersonal communication. New York: Harper & Row., & (1988). Rupert Murdoch and the demonology of professional journalism. In J. W.Carey (Ed.), Media, myths, and narratives: Television and the press (pp. 246–261). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.(1989). New directions for research in journalism history. In L.Caswell (Ed.), Guide to sources in journalism history (pp. 31–46). Westport, CT: Greenwood.(1990). The politics of the New Journalism. In N.Sims (Ed.), Literary journalism in the twentieth century (pp. 110–129). New York: Oxford University Press.(1991a). A beginner's guide to doing qualitative research in mass communication. Journalism and Mass Communication Monographs, 125, 1–29.(1991b). Interesting the public: A brief history of the newsreading movement. Communication, 12, 285–297.(1994). Making the news relevant to democracy. In R.Anderson, R.Dardenne, & G.Killenberg, The conversation of journalism (pp. vii–xvii). Westport, CT: Praeger.(1995). [Review of the book Whose art is it?]Critical Studies in Mass Communication, 12, 488–490.(1998a). Finding ourselves in the New Journalism: A struggle for meaning in a chaotic time. Media Studies Journal, 12, 142–147.(1998b). Jane Kramer. In A. J.Kaul (Ed.), Dictionary of literary biography—American literary journalists, 1945–1995 (Vol. 185, pp. 138–148). Detroit: Gale Research.(1999). Journalism and the sociology of public life. In T.Glasser (Ed.), The idea of public journalism (pp. 134–151). New York: Guilford.(2003a). Recovering journalism as a democratic art. In J.Harper (Ed.), Media, profit and politics: Competing priorities in an open society (pp. 18–32). Kent, OH: Kent State University Press.(2003b). What it means when a newspaper dies. Manuscript submitted for publication.(2002). The myth of “the local” in American journalism. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 79, 308–324. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/107769900207900204, & (2002). Making better social worlds: Engaging in and facilitating dialogic communication. Redwood City, CA: Pearce Associates.(2001). The Public Dialogue Consortium's school-wide dialogue process: A communication approach to develop citizenship skills and enhance school climate. Communication Theory, 11, 105–123. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2885.2001.tb00235.x, & (1989). Communication and the human condition. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.(1993). Achieving dialogue with “the other” in the postmodern world. In P.Gaunt (Ed.), Beyond agendas: New directions in communication research (pp. 59–74). Westport, CT: Greenwood.([Page 295]1994). Interpersonal communication: Making social worlds. New York: HarperCollins.(1995). Creating places for dialogic argument in the national conversation. In S.Jackson (Ed.), Argumentation and values (pp. 242–249). Backlick, VA: Speech Communication Association.(1999). Using CMM: The coordinated management of meaning. Redwood City, CA: Pearce Associates.(1979). A model of hierarchical meanings in coherent conversation and a study of indirect responses. Communication Monographs, 46, 75–87. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03637757909375993, & (1979). On what to look at when studying communication: A hierarchical model of actors’ meanings. Communication, 4, 195–220., , & (1981). The coordinated management of meaning: Human communication in a new key. In C.Wilder-Mott & J.Weakland (Eds.), Rigor and imagination: Essays from the legacy of Gregory Bateson (pp. 149–194). New York: Praeger., , & (1997). Moral conflict: When social worlds collide. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage., & (2000). Combining passions and abilities: Toward dialogic virtuosity. Southern Communication Journal, 65, 161–175. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10417940009373165, & (Peck, E. G., & Mink, J. S. (Eds.). (1998). Common ground: Feminist collaboration in the academy. Albany: State University of New York Press.2000). Reconstructing communicating: Looking to a future. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.(1999a). Public journalism and democratic theory: Four challenges. In T. L.Glasser (Ed.), The idea of public journalism (pp. 99–117). New York: Guilford.(1999b). Speaking into the air: A history of the idea of communication. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226922638.001.0001(1997). Creating country music: Fabricating authenticity. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.(1995). The mangle of practice. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226668253.001.0001(Pilotta, J. J. (Ed.). (1982). Interpersonal communication: Essays in phenomenology and hermeneutics. Washington, DC: University Press of America.1990). Science of communication: Its phenomenological foundation. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum., & (2002, June 7). The life and the mind. The Chronicle of Higher Education, A16–A18.(1990). The mode of information: Poststructuralism and social context. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.(1995). The second media age. Cambridge, UK: Polity.(2001). What's the matter with the Internet?Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.(1985). Amusing ourselves to death: Public discourse in the age of show business. New York: Viking.(1992). Technopoly: The surrender of culture to technology. New York: Knopf.([Page 296]1974). The components of dialogue. Western Journal of Speech Communication, 38, 199–212.(1950). Hollywood, the dream factory: An anthropologist looks at the movie-makers. Boston: Little, Brown.(1969). Why am I afraid to tell you who I am?Chicago: Argus.(1978). The cultural dialogue: An introduction to intercultural communication. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.(2000). Infinite potential: The life and times of David Bohm. Retrieved August 27, 2002, from http://www.theosophy-nw.org/thesnw/science/sc-pruyn.htm(Public Conversations Project. (2002). About PCP. Retrieved March 24, 2002, from http://www.publicconversations.org/Pages/aboutpcp.htmlPublic Dialogue Consortium. (2002). About the PDC. Retrieved March 24, 2002, from http://www.publicdialogue.org/pdc/index.html1994). Conflict resolution and ethnicity. Westport, NY: Praeger.(1992). Peace: An idea whose time has come. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.(1992). Friendship matters: Communication, dialectics, and the life course. New York: Aldine de Gruyter.(1989). Super media. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.(1996). Performing race: Anna Deavere Smith'sFires in the Mirror. Modern Drama, 39, 609–617. http://dx.doi.org/10.3138/md.39.4.609(2001). Paradoxes: Their roots, range, and resolution. Chicago: Open Court.(1991). From text to action: Essays in hermeneutics, II (K.Blarney & J. B.Thompson, Trans.). Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.(1995). Emmanuel Levinas: Thinker of testimony. In Figuring the Sacred: Religion, narrative, and imagination (M. L.Wallace, Ed.; D.Pellauer, Trans.; pp. 108–128). Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press.(1990). The feeling intellect: Selected writings. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.(1997). Hermeneutics and the voice of the other: Re-reading Gadamer's philosophical hermeneutics. Albany: State University of New York Press.(1951). Client-centered therapy: Its current practice, implications, and theory. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.(1961). On becoming a person. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.(1965). Client-centered therapy: Its current practice, implications and theory. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.(1969). The freedom to learn. Columbus, OH: Charles E. Merrill.(1972). Some social issues which concern me. Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 12, 45–60. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/002216787201200205(1980). A way of being. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.(2001). Twilight Los Angeles: Discussion guide. San Francisco: American Documentary., & (1967). The linguistic turn. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.(1979). Philosophy and the mirror of nature. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.(1989). Contingency, irony, and solidarity. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511804397([Page 297]1999). What are journalists for?New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.(1989). Paradigms lost and regained. In B.Dervin, L.Grossberg, B. J.O'Keefe, & E.Wartella (Eds.), Rethinking communication: Vol. 1. Paradigm issues (pp. 21–39). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.(1975). Communicating personally: A theory of interpersonal communication and human relationships. Indianapolis, IN: Bobbs-Merrill., Jr., & (1997). Civic wars: Democracy and public life in the American city during the nineteenth century. Berkeley: University of California Press.(1974). A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language, 50, 696–735. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/412243, , & (1985). The man who mistook his wife for a hat. London: Duckworth.(1998). Martin Heidegger: Between good and evil. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.(2001). Improvising commitment in close relationships: A relational dialectics perspective. In J. H.Harvey & A. E.Wenzel (Eds.), Close romantic relationships: Maintenance and enhancement (pp. 115–132). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum., & (1993). Celebrating the other: A dialogic account of human nature. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.(1999). A public peace process: Sustained dialogue to transform racial and ethnic conflicts. New York: St. Martin's Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1057/9780312299392(1993). Anna Deavere Smith: Acting as incorporation. TDR: The Drama Review, 37, 63–64. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1146293(1993). On dialogue, culture, and organizational learning. Organizational Dynamics, 22, 40–51. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0090-2616%2893%2990052-3(1987). Discourse markers. New York: Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511611841(1969). Experience and being. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.(1986). Communicative praxis and the space of subjectivity. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.(1995). The power of news. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.(1997). Why conversation is not the soul of democracy. Critical Studies in Mass Communication, 14, 297–309. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15295039709367020(1998). The good citizen: A history of American civic life. New York: Free Press.(1999). What public journalism knows about journalism but doesn't know about “public.” In T. L.Glasser (Ed.), The idea of public journalism (pp. 118–133). New York: Guilford.(2003). The sociology of news. New York: Norton.(1990). Dialogue at the margins: Whorf, Bakhtin, and linguistic relativity. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.(1966). Collected papers III: Studies in phenomenological philosophy (I.Schutz, Ed.). The Hague, Netherlands: Martin Nijhoff.(1960). FIRO: A three-dimensional theory of interpersonal behavior. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.(1968). Accounts. American Sociological Review, 33, 46–62. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2092239, & (1969). Speech acts: An essay in the philosophy of language. London: Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139173438([Page 298]1990). Epistemology of the closet. Berkeley: University of California Press.(1995). Treating psychosis by means of open dialogue. In S.Friedman (Ed.), The reflecting team in action (pp. 62–80). New York: Guilford Press., , , , , & (1990). The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization. New York: Doubleday.(1994). The fifth discipline fieldbook. New York: Doubleday., , , , & (1971). The war with words: Structure and transcendence. The Hague: Mouton.(1979). Rhetorical analysis of nonpublic discourse. Communication Quarterly, 27, 21–30. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01463377909369338(1973). The politics of nonviolent action. Boston: Porter Sargent.(1990). Foreword. In P.Freire, Pedagogy of the oppressed (M. B.Ramos, Trans.; pp. 9–14). New York: Continuum.(1988). The presence of the past: Morphic resonance and the habits of nature. New York: Times.(1980). Action, joint action, and intentionality. In M.Brenner (Ed.), The structure of action (pp. 28–65). Oxford, UK: Basil Blackwell.(1984). Social accountability and selfhood. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.(1991). Wittgenstein and psychology: On our “hook up” to reality. In A. P.Griffiths (Ed.), The Wittgenstein centenary essays (pp. 193–208). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.(1993a). Conversational realities: Constructing life through language. London: Sage.(1993b). Cultural politics of everyday life: Social constructionism, rhetoric, and knowing of the third kind. Toronto, Ontario, Canada: Toronto University Press.(1995). Dialogical psychology. In J. A.Smith, R.Harrè, & L.Van Langenhove (Eds.), Rethinking psychology (pp. 160–178). London: Sage.(2000). Inside dialogical realities: From an abstract-systematic to a participatory-wholistic understanding of communication. Southern Communication Journal, 65, 119–132. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10417940009373162(2003). “Real presences”: Meaning as living movement in a participatory world. Theory & Psychology, 13, 435–468. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/09593543030134001(1956). Four theories of the press: The authoritation, libertarian, social responsibility, and Soviet communist concepts of what the press should be and do. Urbana: University of Illinois Press., , & (1985). Family communication: An integrated systems approach. New York: Gardner.(1995). Toward study of the consequentialty (not consequences) of communication. In S. J.Sigman (Ed.), The consequentiality of communication (pp. 1–14). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.(1974). Expression and control in human interaction: Perspective on humanistic psychology. Western Journal of Speech Communication, 38, 269–277.(2002). Light in the heart of darkness: EMDR & the treatment of war and terrorism survivors. New York: Norton., & ([Page 299]2001). The making of multivocal culture: Building community on a university campus. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Colorado, Boulder.(1976). Double bind: The foundation of the communicational approach to the family. New York: Grune & Stratton., & (1993). Fires in the mirror: Crown Heights, Brooklyn and other identities. New York: Anchor Books.(1994). Twilight: Los Angeles, 1992. New York: Anchor Books.(2000). Talk to me: Listening between the lines. New York: Random House.(2001). Twilight Los Angeles [Video]. New York: PBS Video.(Producer), (Producer), & (Director). (1997). Belief and resistance: Dynamics of contemporary intellectual controversy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.(1985). Martin Heidegger and the dialogue with being. Central States Speech Journal, 36, 256–269. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10510978509363223(1973). Philosophical principles in the traditional and emerging views of rhetoric. In D. G.Douglas (Ed.), Philosophers on rhetoric: Traditional and emerging views (pp. 15–22). Skokie, IL: National Textbook., & (1987). The everyday world as problematic: A feminist sociology. Boston: Northeastern University Press.(Smith, J. A., Harrè, R., & Langenhove, L. V. (Eds.). (1995). Rethinking psychology. London: Sage.Smith, M. A., & Kollock, P. (Ed.). (1999). Communities in cyberspace. New York: Routledge. http://dx.doi.org/10.5117/97890562908181996). Hypertext: The electronic labyrinth. Melbourne, Australia: Melbourne University Press.(1997). News reporting and professionalism: Some constraints on the reporting of the news. In D.Berkowitz (Ed.), Social meanings of news: A text-reader (pp. 138–154). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.(2001). Public dialogue and participatory democracy: The Cupertino community project. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.(1985). Man made language ((2nd ed.). Boston: Routledge.1987). In other worlds: Essays in cultural politics. London: Methuen.(1990). The post-colonial critic: Interviews, strategies, dialogues (S.Harasyn, Ed.). London: Routledge.(1967). Language and silence: Essays 1958–1966. New York: Atheneum.(1989). Real presences. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.(2002). The first relationship: Infant and mother. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.(Stewart, J. (Ed.). (1973). Bridges not walls: A book about interpersonal communication. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.1978). Foundations of dialogic communication. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 64, 183–201. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00335637809383424(1994). Foreword. In R.Anderson, K. N.Cissna, & R. C.Arnett (Eds.), The reach of dialogue: Confirmation, voices, and community (pp. i–xi). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.(1995). Language as articulate contact: Toward a post-semiotic philosophy of communication. Albany: State University of New York Press.([Page 300]Stewart, J. (Ed.). (1996). Beyond the symbol model: Reflections on the representational nature of language. Albany: State University of New York Press.1975). Together: Communicating interpersonally. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley., & (2000). Dialogue as tensional, ethical practice. Southern Communication Journal, 65, 224–242. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10417940009373169, & (1999). Difficult conversations: How to discuss what matters most. New York: Viking., , & (Strate, L., Jacobson, R., & Gibson, S. B. (Eds.). (1996). Communication and cyberspace: Social interaction in an electronic environment. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.1994). Culture, meaning, and interpersonal communication. In M. L.Knapp & G. R.Miller (Eds.), Handbook of interpersonal communication ((2nd ed., pp. 286–322). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.1986). Between meaning and representation: Dialogic aspects of interpretation scholarship. In T.Colson (Ed.), Renewal and revision: The future of interpretation (pp. 69–91). Denton, TX: NB Omega.(1988). Performance and critical theory: Negotiating the tensions between art and everyday life—A response. Literature in Performance, 8, 35–38. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10462938809365879(1989). The politics of asking women's questions: Voice and value in the poetry of Adrienne Rich. Text and Performance Quarterly, 9, 24–41. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10462938909365910(1990). Research in interpretation and performance studies: Trends, issues, priorities. In G. M.Phillips & J. T.Wood (Eds.), Speech communication: Essays to commemorate the 75th anniversary of the Speech Communication Association (pp. 181–204). Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press., , & (Study Circles. (2002). Who we are. Retrieved March 24, 2002, from http://www.studycircles.org/pages/who.html1999). Beyond Buber: Gestalt therapy in the light of Levinas. The Gestalt Journal, 22, 65–87.(1978). Intentionality, intersubjectivity, and the between: Buber and Levinas on affectivity and the dialogical principle. Thought, 53, 292–309. http://dx.doi.org/10.5840/thought197853346(1989). Talking voices: Repetition, dialogue, and imagery in conversational discourse. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.(1998). The argument culture: Moving from debate to dialogue. New York: Random House.(1999). The argument culture: Moving from debate to dialogue. New York: Ballantine.(1993). Men & women: Talking together [Videorecording]. New York: Mystic Fire Video., & (1985). Human agency and language. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139173483(1991a). The dialogical self. In D. R.Hiley, J. F.Bohman, & R.Shusterman (Eds.), The interpretative turn (pp. 304–314). Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.(1991b). The ethics of authenticity. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.(1995). Philosophical arguments. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.(1993). Rethinking the theory of organizational communication: How to read an organization. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.([Page 301]2001). The computerization of work: A communication perspective. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage., , , & (2000). The emergent organization: Communication as its site and surface. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum., & (1994). Imagologies: Media philosophy. London: Routledge., & (1983). The spoken word and the work of interpretation. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.(Tedlock, D., & Mannheim, B. (Eds.). (1995). The dialogic emergence of culture. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.Teens may have hinted at massacre in class. (2002, March 30). Winston-Salem Journal, p. A2.The Crown Heights conflicts: Background information. (1993). Fires in the mirror: Essays and teaching strategies. Boston, MA: WGBH Educational Print and Outreach.1993). Guinier miss. The New Republic, 208, 16–19.(1984). The other: Studies in the social ontology of Husserl, Heidegger, Sartre, and Buber (C.Macann, Trans.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.(1975). The necessary and sufficient characteristics of dialogic communication: The dialogic process equation. Journal of the Illinois Speech and Theatre Association, 29, 34–42.(1982). Toward interpersonal dialogue. New York: Longman.(1947). Wiring a continent: The history of the telegraph industry in the United States, 1832–1866. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.(1984). Mikhail Bakhtin: The dialogical principle (W.Godzich, Trans.). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.(1957). The meaning of persons. New York: Harper & Row.(1978). Making news: A study in the construction of reality. New York: Free Press.(1969). The ritual process: Structure and anti-structure. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.(1987). The unspeakable: Discourse, dialogue, and rhetoric in the postmodern world. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.(1983). Critical heuristics of social planning: A new approach to practical philosophy. Bern, Switzerland: Haupt.(1987). Social theory, its situation and its task. New York: Cambridge University Press.(1987). Order and history: Vol. 5. In search of order. Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press.(2000). Order in history: Vol. 18. In search of order. Columbia: University of Missouri Press.(1997). Blood lines: From ethnic pride to ethnic terrorism. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.(1973). Marxism and the philosophy of language (L.Matejka & I. R.Titunik, Trans.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.(1976). Discourse in life and discourse in art. In V. N.Volosinov, Freudianism: A Marxist critique (I. R.Titunik & N. H.Bruss, Eds.; I. R.Titunik, Trans.; pp. 93–116). New York: Academic Press.([Page 302]1968). General systems theory. New York: Braziller.(2001). State of emergency declared after acquittal of Cincinnati cop who shot youth. Retrieved August 30, 2002, from http://www.wsws.org/articles/2001/sep2001/cinc-s28.shtml(1996). Levinas, Buber and the concept of otherness in international relations: A Reply to David Campbell. Millennium: Journal of International Studies, 25, 111–128. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/03058298960250010701(2002). Publics and counterpublics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.(1987). Gadamer: Hermeneutics, tradition, and reason. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.(Washington, J. M. (Ed.). (1992). Martin Luther King, Jr., I have a dream: Writings and speeches that changed the world. San Francisco: HarperCollins.1986). Invisible guests: The development of imaginal dialogues. Hillsdale, NJ: Analytic Press.(1967). Pragmatics of human communication: A study of interactional patterns, pathologies, and paradoxes. New York: Norton., , & (1974). Change: Principles of problem formation and problem resolution. New York: W. W. Norton., , & (1981). Eric Voegelin, philosopher of history. Seattle: University of Washington Press.(1979). The social psychology of organizing ((2nd ed.). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.1979). Jürgen Habermas and the dialectical perspective on argumentation. Journal of the American Forensic Association, 16, 83–94.(1994). Temporal qualities of relationships: Organismic, transactional, and dialectical views. In M. L.Knapp & G. R.Miller (Eds.), Handbook of interpersonal communication (, & (2nd ed., pp. 323–379). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.1991). Voices of the mind: A sociocultural approach to mediated action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.(1993a). Keeping faith: Philosophy and race in America. New York: Routledge.(1993b). Race matters. Boston, MA: Beacon Press.(2001). Identity, narrative and politics. London: Routledge.(1989). Principia mathematica. London: Cambridge University Press., & (Facilitating peace: Insights from three experiences. Interview with Carl R. Rogers. Retrieved August 30, 2002 from http://www.ucf.ics.uci.edu/zencin/peace2/interviews/rogers-facilitating.html(n.d.).1993). Sympathy for Guinier. Newsweek, 121, 78.(1992). The alchemy of race and rights. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.(1977). Marxism and literature. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.(1958). Mate selection: A study of complementary needs. New York: Harper & Row.(Withdraw Guinier. (1993). The New Republic, 208, 7.1991a). Prologue: An invitation to our readers. In C.Witherell & N.Noddings (Eds.), Stories lives tell: Narrative and dialogue in education (pp. 1–12). New York: Teachers College Press., & ([Page 303]1991b). Stories lives tell: Narrative and dialogue in education. New York: Teachers College Press., & (1921). Tractatus logico-philosophicus. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.(1963). Philosophical investigations (G. E. M.Anscombe, Trans.). Oxford, UK: Basil Blackwell.(Wold, A. H. (Ed.). (1992). The dialogical alternative: Towards a theory of language and mind. London: Scandinavian University Press.1997). Diversity in dialogue: Commonalities and differences between friends. In J. M.Makau & R. C.Arnett (Eds.), Communication ethics in an age of diversity (pp. 5–26). Urbana: University of Illinois Press.(1994). The moral animal: Evolutionary psychology and everyday life. New York: Vintage.(1991). Coming to public judgment: Making democracy work in a complex world. Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press.(1999). The magic of dialogue: Transforming conflict into cooperation. New York: Simon and Schuster.(1990). Justice and the politics of difference. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.(1999). Making the neighborhood work: The improbabilities of public journalism. In T. L.Glasser (Ed.), The idea of public journalism (pp. 152–172). New York: Guilford.(Zelizer, B., & Allan, S. (Eds.). (2002). Journalism after September 11. New York: Routledge.[Page 304]