Bioethics and Communicative Ethics

2003 ◽  
pp. 91-103
Author(s):  
Un-Jong Pak
Keyword(s):  
Communicative Ethics

Refiguring Ricoeur: narrative force and communicative ethics

1995 ◽  
Vol 21 (5-6) ◽  
pp. 99-110
Author(s):  
Mara Rainwater
Keyword(s):  
Communicative Ethics

Building consensus on user participation in social work: A conversation analysis

2018 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
pp. 20-40
Author(s):  
Terry TF Leung ◽  
Barry CL Lam
Keyword(s):  
Conversation Analysis ◽  
Service Management ◽  
Panel Discussion ◽  
User Participation ◽  
Service Users ◽  
Welfare Service ◽  
Face To Face ◽  
Communicative Ethics ◽  
The Face ◽  
Set Up

Summary In order to understand how mutual understanding was achieved in discursive interactions between the welfare service users and service practitioners, conversation analysis was conducted in four discussion panels set up for building consensus on the appropriate structure for user participation in service management. Conversations in eight panel discussion meetings were audio-taped for analysing the talks-in-interaction therein. Drawing on the conversation analysis, the article uncovers the dynamics of consensus building among participants from different epistemic communities. Findings The study identifies the extent of divergence in views among stakeholders, which could have been obscured by the pressure to acquiesce in platform of face-to-face coordination. In the contest for truth between the welfare service users and service practitioners, personal experience has not been accepted as legitimate resource for supporting truth claims. Having limited argument resources on issues of service management, the welfare service users perceived argumentation in panel discussion a threatening venture that they chose to avoid. Avoidance was also a strategy that panel participants employed to maintain mundane interactions in the face of looming dissents. The article argues that the Habermasian communicative ethics are not panacea to the problem of coordination between the welfare service users and service practitioners. An agonistic model of democracy is called for to shift the objective of communication from gauging consensus to encouraging articulation of disagreements in the intricate user participation project. Application The article provides a new direction for developing the user participation imperative to address necessary pluralities among stakeholders of welfare services.

Communicative Ethics

2017 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 80-99 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ronald C. Arnett
Keyword(s):  
Production System ◽  
Human Action ◽  
Global Communication ◽  
Communicative Ethics ◽  
Communicative Act ◽  
First Philosophy

Abstract This essay examines the importance of semioethics in relationship to the work of Levinas. The interplay of semioethics and Levinas’s commitment to “ethics as first philosophy” announces the communicative height and weight of a semiotic signification that demands responsive human action. Semioethics is a communicative act that wades through the plethora of signs in the global communication production system with the objective of discerning signs of ill health that curtail care of life. Semioethics necessitates attentiveness and responsiveness to Otherness and difference. Semioethics functions as resistance, the unwillingness to accept and abide within an unreflective communication production system composed of taken-for-granted sameness of process and procedure.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document