Dialogue Versus Debate

Of the numerous forms of interaction, two of the most distinct are dialogue and debate. The former refers more to a cooperative exchange while the latter speaks more to defeating or overcoming what the other participate has to say. One is about working together while the other revolves around working against. Despite the differences, the two can and many times do lead to greater enlightenment and understanding. Because on various levels each of us engages in these forms of communicating almost daily, in the realm of communication both forms have a firm and permanent place. A world with neither dialogue nor debate us unimaginable.    

In a chapter in "The Warrior and the Pacifist," author Lisa Schirch outlines a specific set of differences between the two. In dialogue, she begins, there is a goal of understanding different perspectives. During the interaction, each participant accepts the experiences of the other as valid and real. Further, participants often at least give the impression they are open to changing their mind. Debate, however, is a very different matter. Participants here are opponents. As part of that, according to Schirch, emotions can and do run high as one side is constantly trying to prove how the other is wrong.  This kind of exchange can be intense while in dialogue, generally, all parties are more relaxed and feeling far less under attack.  

Can an exchange start out as a dialogue and  evolve into a debate? You bet. Perhaps one key characteristic of dialogues in that they can quickly evolve into a different form of communication and, at times, revert back to their original form. Ideally, however, there is no winner in the traditional sense at the end of a dialogue. Instead there are simply several folks who emerge with a deeper understanding of each other. Is one better form of communicating more appealing then the other? While I will leave that for others to decide, I will note each is vital to our ability and need to connect with others.