Over the past several years, the nation has seen the capacity for authentic discussion and civil discourse between opposing political parties and individuals deteriorate. The political divide has become a gaping crevasse rather than a figurative line in the sand. Back-biting and name-calling are the norm, making it difficult if not impossible to engage in meaningful conversation with someone who has a different perspective than our own.
In light of these challenges, there is a critical need to rebuild the competencies essential to civil discourse. Research. Negotiation. Oration. The ability to listen to all sides of an argument, irrespective of one's personal opinion. And the ability to disagree without being disagreeable. These are the skills we must cultivate for people to come together, have productive discussions and begin to solve challenging problems.
Insights from Woodley Institute Board Members
Civil Discourse Enables Civic Pluralism
Emily Clark, Professor of Religious Studies and Founding Institute Board Member
Civil Discourse enables civic pluralism. We are at a high point of division in American culture right now. Americans are incredibly siloed at this time for reasons that center on the intersection of religion, politics, and culture. People are angry and disillusioned with where the country could be heading and what is possible. The mission of Gonzaga University is founded on social justice and cultivating students and a broader community who care for the common good by being people for and with others. Civil discourse that emphasizes respect, relationships, and cooperation creates new opportunities for cultural bridge building across differences.
Re-Learning Discourse and Dialogue
Vēta Schlimgen, Associate Professor of History and Founding Institute Board Member
Civil discourse is dialogue, and it can take many forms. It must be informed (that is, you know something), inquisitive (you’re learning), and open to engagement, even when we encounter something disagreeable. We are experiencing civil strife at this moment due to breakdowns in human-centered discourse and dialogue. Technology is, in part, to blame because, despite its marvelous achievements, it disconnects us from direct human interaction, eroding trust and squandering meaning. We have lost sympathy and absorbed indifference through online echo-chambers or fervent social media chains. Though all is not lost! We serve our community and society when we engage in human-centered discourse, even when we cannot agree. History, morality, and communication all play a critical role in re-learning dialogue that centers listening, connects with others who feel heard, and develops awareness.
Civil Discourse is a Community Practice
Karen Petruska, Associate Professor of Communication Studies and Founding Institute Board Member
Contemporary discourse, particularly online, tends to be uttered impulsively, inspired by emotional rhetorical appeals meant to provoke fear, anger, or other strong emotions. This sort of discourse rarely creates the space for mutual recognition and understanding. In light of this challenge, the Jesuit practice of discernment has never been more relevant or valuable. Taking time to reflect, to contemplate fears, to articulate values, and to cultivate our capacity for genuine listening prepares us to meet others in dialogue with curiosity, respect, and confidence. A corrosive media environment that rewards quick takes and provocation threatens our ability to solve the urgent problems facing our communities, yet Gonzaga’s mission calls us to be persons for others, and therefore part of the solution to problems. Through our courses in argumentation, community engagement, media analysis, and civic identity, we hope to cultivate future leaders who will impart these skills and values to the broader world.
Civil Discourse and Belonging
Rebecca Stephanis, Professor of Modern Languages and Literature (Spanish/Latin America)
Civil discourse and engagement inherently require mutual respect and recognition of the human connection between two or more individuals. Oftentimes, however, at the time of exchange, the boundaries around who belongs to the “insider” and “outsider” group become more entrenched and visible. This has been exacerbated in recent years by technological advances that – while they have the potential to build connections across geographical, linguistic, and cultural divides – in practice have facilitated isolation from in-person exchanges, changed the nature of human-centered dialogue, and allowed people to retreat to the comfort of echo-chambers. One of the most damaging consequences of this is that it facilitates the construction of dangerous misperceptions, stereotypes, and dehumanizing language. It is in spaces that allow for reflection, vulnerability, and opportunities to learn and grow that we can begin to live the mission of Gonzaga University.
Civil Discourse and Information Literacy
Caitlin Bagley, Associate Professor Foley Library
Civil discourse requires the cognitive ability to receive and parse new information within the greater context of personal worldviews and cultural worldviews. When presented with information from others that goes against our own worldviews, we have to learn how to react and receive that information while remaining true to our values. Through information literacy, we are given skills and assets that allow us to consider not just what is being said, but also where it is coming from, the systems that generated that information, and perhaps also the kindness to handle information that is well meant, but untrue.
More Voices from across Campus
Civil Discourse is Essential to Develop Beyond Ourselves
Kimberly P. Weber, Professor of Special Education School of Education
"Civil discourse is essential to develop beyond ourselves. Being able to accept that many are never able to accurately see from another’s vantage point can become a place to begin to search for common ground and agreements that can benefit many. It is often difficult to understand the view of another when our minds are full of our own opinions, knowledge and experiences. Learning to set aside what we think we know may open doors to seeing beyond ourselves. We must speak kindly, listen intently, hear hard things, show respect through actions, and see that not everything is about us.How will we make changes the world needs most if we are unable to have the difficult conversations needed to gain a larger worldview?"
Civil Discourse is a Skill and a Calling
John N. Sheveland, Professor of Religious Studies College of Arts & Sciences
"In the exchange of wisdom but also grievances across lines of religious difference, civil discourse is a skill and a calling. It invites the opening of minds and hearts to the humanity of others, not to agree, disagree, or change their ideas but in a desire to encounter and accompany, with hope for reconciliation. Because we lack the deep listening which strengthens civil discourse, we are called out from habituated narrowness of vision and indifference. In 1994 the Jesuits wrote, citing an address of John Paul II in Chennai, “An open and sincere interreligious dialogue is our cooperation with God’s ongoing dialogue with humanity. ‘By dialogue we let God be present in our midst, for as we open ourselves to one another, we open ourselves to God.’"
Civil Discourse is About Building a Culture of Respect
Molly Pepper, Professor of Management School of Business Administration
"In human resource management, we depend on civil discourse to create working environments where employees can thrive. Civil discourse is about building a culture of respect where people can bring their whole selves to the workplace and feel safe doing so. It is important that leadership models civil discourse through difficult but productive conversations, builds policies that support employee rights, and always follows through to rebuild relationships when discourse falls short of civility. In HR, we talk about training employees to engage in civil discourse, recognizing that an organization where diverse opinions are heard and respected is not only a great place to work, but is an organization with a competitive advantage."
The Common Definition of Civil Discourse Has to Change
Chris Francovich, Associate Professor, Doctoral Program School of Leadership Studies
"I believe that what I think of as a common definition of civil discourse has to change – to move away from the liberal idea that the word ‘civil’ connotes a generalized and universalized ethical framework that ipso facto legitimizes hegemonic and/or global economic, political, social and psychological phenomena. What ‘civil discourse’ must, in my view, evolve to is the recognition that all interlocutors must learn the skills of suspending their judgments, preferences and biases while simultaneously regulating their affective response to the utterances and affects of others all the while staying with the trouble of establishing mutual intelligibility. A key element of this conceptualization is that the weight and import of significations must be commensurate with the local and situated nature of the discourse itself."