Beyond the abyss: a proposal for navigating polarized positions

ABSTRACT

In response to relentless levels of political polarization in the United States, this essay asks to what extent a shift in pedagogical practices might aid in ameliorating it, especially through the inculcation of rhetorical skills which lend themselves toward the cultivation of a robust form of civic dialogue. To do so, the relationship between rhetoric, (intergroup) dialogue, and debate is assessed and considered with respect to deliberation in the public sphere to provide context for the theoretical maxims and praxis of civic discourse. Then, using the preceding analyses, an evaluative framework is offered to assess the efficacy of dialogic rhetoric in a contemporary setting. Using this framework implementation of the Dialogue and Argumentation for Cultural Literacy Learning in Schools (DIALLS) program being pioneered throughout the European Union into American pedagogy is considered as a means to mitigate future polarizing discourse through the promotion of a nuanced, collaborative approach to meaning making and knowledge construction. Following this examination, a brief assessment of the rhetoric of Democratic Senator Sherrod Brown from Ohio is offered to illustrate the practical applicability of inclusive, dialogic rhetoric in an age of polarization and division.

Acknowledgments

The author would like to acknowledge John Rief (Ph.D.), and each of the anonymous reviewers who provided thoughtful insights regarding the arguments presented in this essay.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Funding

No sources of funding to declare.