Advertisement

Sophia

pp 1–14 | Cite as

Dialogue as the Conditio Humana: a Critical Account of Dmitri Nikulin’s Theory of the Dialogical

  • Bradley S. WarfieldEmail author
Article

Abstract

Dmitri Nikulin is one of the few contemporary philosophers to have devoted books to the topic of dialogue and the dialogical self, especially in the last fifteen years. Yet his work on dialogue and the dialogical has received scant attention by philosophers, and this neglect has hurt the ongoing development of contemporary philosophical work on dialogicality. I want to address this lacuna in contemporary philosophical scholarship on dialogicality and suggest that, although Nikulin’s account is no doubt insightful and thought-provoking, it is problematic for two main reasons: first, his account fails to recognize the proper relationship between dialogue and agency; and second, his enumeration of the necessary and sufficient conditions for dialogue contains conceptual inconsistencies.

Keywords

Dmitri Nikulin Dialogicality The dialogical self Dialogue Agency 

Notes

Acknowledgements

I want to thank the anonymous reviewers for their insightful comments on an earlier draft of this paper. I also want to thank Michael Butler and Anthony Vincent Fernandez for their helpful remarks on an earlier draft of this paper. Any failings in what follows are my responsibility alone.

References

  1. Bakhtin, Mikhail. 1982a. The dialogic imagination: four essays by M.M. Bakhtin. Ed. by M. Holquist. Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
  2. Bakhtin, Mikhail. 1982b. “Discourse in the novel.” The dialogic imagination: four essays by M.M. Bakhtin. Ed. by M. Holquist. Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
  3. Bakhtin, M. (1984a). Problems of Dostoevsky’s poetics. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bakhtin, M. (1984b). “Toward a reworking of the Dostoevsky book.” Appendix 2 in Problems of Dostoevsky’s poetics. Ed. and trans. by Caryl Emerson. pp. 283–302. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  5. Bakhtin, Mikhail. 1986. Speech genres and other late essays Ed. by Caryl Emerson and Michael Holquist. Trans. By Vern W. McGee. Austin: Univ. of Texas press.Google Scholar
  6. Butler, Edward P. 2007. On Dialogue review essay. Pp. 167–176. In Graduate Faculty Philosophy Journal. Vol. 28, No. 2. New York: The New School for Social Research.Google Scholar
  7. Cole, E. B. (1993). “Body, mind, and gender.” From chapter three of philosophy and feminist criticism: An Introduction. Middletown: Paragon Press.Google Scholar
  8. Fritz, J. H. (2015). Plato and the elements of dialogue. Lanham: Lexington Books.Google Scholar
  9. Gadamer, H.-G. (2004). Truth and method (2nd ed.). New York: Bloomsbury Academic.Google Scholar
  10. Heidegger, M. (2008). Being and time. Trans. by John Macquarrie and Edward Robinson, with new foreword by Taylor Carman. New York: Harper and Row Publishers, Inc.Google Scholar
  11. Held, V. (1990). Feminist transformations of moral theory. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 50, 321–344 Autumn. International Phenomenological Society.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hermans, H. J. M. (2001). The dialogical self: toward a theory of personal and cultural positioning. Culture & Psychology, 7(3), 243–281 September.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hermans, H. J. M. (Ed.). (2012a). Applications of dialogical self theory: new directions for child and adolescent development. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  14. Hermans, Hubert J.M. 2012b. Between dreaming and recognition seeking: the emergence of dialogical self theory. Lanham: University Press of America, Inc.Google Scholar
  15. Hermans, H. J. M., & Dimaggio, G. (2016). The dialogical self in psychotherapy: an introduction. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  16. Hermans, H. J. M., & Gieser, T. (Eds.). (2014). Handbook of Dialogical Self Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Hermans, H. J. M., & Hermans-Konopka, A. (2010). Dialogical self theory: positioning and counter-positioning in a globalizing society. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hermans, H. J. M., & Kempen, H. J. G. (1993). The dialogical self: meaning as movement. San Diego: Academic Press, Inc..Google Scholar
  19. Hermans, Hubert J.M., Harry J.G. Kempen, and Rens J.P. van Loon. 1992. “The dialogical self: beyond individualism and rationalism.” Pp. 23–33. In American Psychologist. 47. January.Google Scholar
  20. Kögler, Hans-Herbert. 2010. “Being as dialogue, or the ethical consequences of interpretation.” Consequences of hermeneutics: fifty years after Gadamer’s Truth and method. Ed. by Jeff Malpas and Santiago Zabala. Evanston: Northwestern University Press.Google Scholar
  21. Lysaker, P., & Lysaker, J. (2008). Schizophrenia and the fate of the self. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Miller, Mitchell. 2011. Dialectic and Dialogue review essay. Pp. 177–189. In Graduate Faculty Philosophy Journal. Vol. 32, No. 1. New York: The New School for Social Research.Google Scholar
  23. Nikulin, D. (2006). On Dialogue. Lanham: Lexington Books.Google Scholar
  24. Nikulin, D. (2010). Dialectic and dialogue. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  25. Rule, P. N. (2015). Dialogue and boundary learning. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Russell, L. D. (2012). Creating meaning from chaos: narrative and dialogic encounters in family crisis. Qualitative Inquiry, 18(5), 391–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Solomon, R. (2006). About love: reinventing romance for our times. Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company, Inc..Google Scholar
  28. Taylor, C. (1985a). Philosophical papers, volume I: human agency and language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Taylor, C. (1985b). Philosophical papers, volume II: philosophy and the human sciences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Taylor, Charles. 1992a. “The dialogical self.” The interpretive turn: philosophy, science, culture. Ed. by David R. Hiley, James F. Bohman, and Richard Shusterman. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  31. Taylor, C. (1992b). Sources of the self: the making of the modern identity. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  32. Trimble, L. (2009). Transformative conversations about sexualities pedagogy and the experience of sexual knowing. Sex Education, 9(1), 51–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.The University of Texas Rio Grande ValleyBrownsvilleUSA

Personalised recommendations