The Ethics of Two-Way Symmetry and the Dilemmas of Dialogic Kantianism

Abstract

J. E. Grunig's (1992a) seminal work on excellence theory and subsequent works by other scholars advance the two-way symmetrical model as a best-practice approach to public relations (PR). In part, two-way symmetry is preferred because of an assertion that it is the most ethical form of practice. However, only within a means-based deontological framework do two-way symmetry and the principle of dialogue emerge as universally ethical. Taking an ends-based utilitarian standpoint makes the potential ethical flaws of two-way symmetry apparent. Issues of moral luck, hegemony, and the limitations of dialogue also pose problems for the moral primacy claims surrounding two-way symmetry. The analysis that follows points toward a need for a more relative and contingent approach to PR ethics, and by extension to PR practice itself.

NOTES

Notes

1. At its root, the categorical imperative has three formulations:

• 1) The Universal Law Formulation: “Act only according to that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law” (Kant, 1785/1994, p. 30).

• 2) The Humanity Formulation: “Act in such a way that you treat humanity, whether in your own person or in the person of another, always at the same time as an end and never simply as a means” (Kant, 1785/1994, p. 36).

• 3) The Kingdom of Ends Formulation: “Every rational being must so act as if he were through his maxim always a legislating member in the universal kingdom of ends” (Kant, 1785/1994, p. 43).

2. Bentham's (1789/2004) hedonic calculus also provides evidence to utilitarianism's considerations of more than just numbers. Of the calculus's seven criteria of judging an action (intensity, duration, certainty/uncertainty, propinquity/remoteness, fecundity, purity, and extension), only one, extension, relates to a calculation of the number of persons affected. The others are measures of the quality of goods an action creates.

3. Just as symmetric and asymmetric practices may differ in means yet produce the same ends, the same may also be true of opposing ethical approaches such as deontology and utilitarianism (see Elliott, 2007, p. 111).