Experts in Dialogue: An Introduction

Different approaches to expertise and argumentation are discussed. After introducing the problem of expertise and its present day significance in a historical context, various connections with the study of arguments are highlighted. The need for and potential of argumentation analysis to contribute to existing research in social epistemology, science studies, and cognitive science, is discussed, touching on the problems of reasoning and argumentation, embodiment, tacit knowledge, expert context versus public context, expert disagreement, persuasion versus justification, and argument analysis as meta-expertise. As the arguments used by experts constitute a boundary object, we presume that a dialogue format is suitable to address central problems of the special issue “Rethinking Arguments from Experts”.     

Jonah and Applied Psychoanalytic Dialogue: Introduction

This introduction to a series of fascinating papers on the biblical book of Jonah provides a brief schematic outline of the narrative as well as an orientation to the place of the book in the Jewish liturgy. An explanation is given for why a secular psychoanalytic audience might well be interested in such an effort at applied psychoanalysis. This rationale has to do with the story's universal as well as particularistic significance. Jonah himself may be viewed as attempting to escape from dialogue, but this lively and engaged psychoanalytic dialogue examines and debates the meaning of his story.     

话语分析与心理学研究的对话探析

话语分析（Discourse Analysis）是一种探讨不同场景下话语的组织方式及话语互动的过程和结果的研究立场。它与心理学的对话,在应用上促进了社会心理学、心理咨询与治疗的发展;在理论上补充了心理学的研究方法、加速了＂独白＂心理学向＂对话＂心理学的过渡、推动了心理学本土化的进程。话语分析为心理学提供了新的研究视角,但其反身性和缺乏客观性的特点受到了反对者的质疑。     

Dialogue representation

We consider question-answer dialogues between participants who may disagree with each other. The main problems are: (a) How different speech-acts affect the information in the dialogue; and (b) How to represent what was said in a dialogue, so that we can summarize it even when it involves disagreements (i.e., inconsistencies).We use a fully-typed many-sorted language L with a possible-worlds semantics. L contains nominals representing short answers. The speech-acts are uniformly represented in a dialogue language DL by focus structures, consisting of a mood operator, a topic component and a focus component. Each stage of the dialogue is associated with a set of information functions (g-functions), which are partial functions taking a topic component (representing a question raised) to a set of propositions determined by the corresponding focus component (to the set of answers given to it).Asserting is answering a question and, hence, it causes a new g-function to be defined. Asking is an attempt to cause the hearer to define a new g-function satisfying certain conditions. A question asked requests a true and complete answer. A reaction answers a question if it satisfies some of the conditions of the question. Indirect questions are viewed as indirect answers.A dialogue representation consists of: commitment sets, each representing the commitments expressed by one participant; sets of questions under discussion associated with each stage of the dialogue, and the common ground, containing the g-functions and representing consistently what was said in the dialogue.Concepts of informativeness are naturally defined within the theory. Whether an utterance is informative depends on which question it answers and how the question was answered previously. These concepts yield that uttering mathematical and logical truths is as informative as uttering a contingency.     

Dialogue and Synthesis: Developing Consensus in Visitor Research Methodology

ABSTRACT

This brief synthesis presents the main points of agreement between Dawson and Jensen's article, “‘Towards a ‘Contextual Turn’ in Visitor Studies: Evaluating Visitor Segmentation and Identity-Related Motivations” (this issue) and Falk's reply, “Contextualizing Falk's Identity-Related Visitor Motivation Model” (this issue), and it highlights important considerations for future research.     

Interfaith Dialogue

The modern ecumenical movement initially sprang from the missionary movement. This led to considerable struggle within the ecumenical movement over embracing interfaith dialogue as a main focus of its ministry. This focus was eventually accepted, and since then the ecumenical movement has done much to promote interfaith relations at the local, national, and global level; to struggle with the theological issues such dialogue presents for the Christian faith; and to collaborate with other religions to reflect on common issues faced by the global community. Current Dialogue has played a major role in promoting the dialogue concern.     

Introduction: Postphenomenological Research

This introduction to the special issue of Human Studies on postphenomenology outlines specific developments which have led to this style of phenomenology. Postphenomenology adapts aspects of pragmatism, including its anti-Cartesian program against early modern subject/object epistemology. Postphenomenology retains and emphasizes the use of phenomenological variations as an analytic tool, and in practice postphenomenology takes what is commonly now called “an empirical turn,” which deeply analyzes case studies or concrete issues under its purview.