An Examination of De-Constructive Dialogue of Disagreement through the movie of Carnage (2011)

Author:

ÇALIKOĞLU Burcu Seher1

Affiliation:

1. İZMİR DEMOKRASİ ÜNİVERSİTESİ

Abstract

A quadruple dialogue model was built on the components of "agreement" and "being constructive”. As a sub-model "deconstructive disagreement" dialogue, Carnage (2011) was examined through document analysis. With the content analysis, (1) content, (2) direction and (3) process of deconstructive dialogue of disagreement were explained. (1) For the content, subject of discussion, argument, demonstration, counter-argument and conclusion were revealed. (2) For the direction, intentions, perspectives, and personality traits of the individuals were brought to light. (3) For the process, arguments, counter-arguments and demonstrations produced by individuals were taken into consideration. As a result of the tripartite analysis, the differences in terms of content, direction and process were found out in the quadruple dialogue model. (1) Content is ineffective for the formation of the structure. While (2) direction is explained by the components of (2.a) self and otherness, (2.b) pressure and resistance, (2.c) self-confidence, (2.d) kindness, harmony, and benefit, and (2.e) flexibility; (3) the process is distinguished by the features of (3.a) acceptance and objection in reasoning, (3.b) taking an active and passive role, (3.c) reckoning with oneself, (3.d) seeking information, and (3.e) applying universal intellectual standards. With the help of these features, deconstructive dialogue of disagreement is uncovered.

Publisher

Electronic Journal of Social Sciences

Subject

General Medicine

Reference33 articles.

1. Ackerman, Bruce. (1989). Why dialogue?. The journal of philosophy, 86(1), 5-22.

2. Arıkan, Pınar (2016). Ulusal Çıkar Çatışması ve Mezhepsel Kutuplaşma Arasında İran-Suudi Arabistan Gerginliği. ORSAM Bölgesel Gelişmeler Değerlendirmesi, 38, 1-13.

3. Babacan, Mehmet. (2021). Ortadoğu’da Bölgesel Kutuplaşma Dinamikleri ve Teorik Yansımaları. Anadolu Strateji Dergisi, 3(1), 53-64.

4. Brodbeck, Felix C., Rudolf Kerschreiter, Andreas Mojzisch, Dieter Frey, and Stefan Schulz‐Hardt. "The dissemination of critical, unshared information in decision‐making groups: The effects of pre‐discussion dissent." European Journal of Social Psychology 32, no. 1 (2002): 35-56.

5. Bohm, David, Donald Factor, and Peter Garrett. "Dialogue: A proposal." Retrieved April 24 (1991): 2006.

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3