Advertisement

Moral Dialogues

  • Amitai Etzioni
Chapter
Part of the Library of Public Policy and Public Administration book series (LPPP, volume 11)

Abstract

Outside the walls of capitol buildings throughout the country, citizens engage every day in moral dialogues—organic, disorganized, and sometimes heated interactions, from the intimate to the transnational, at the office, on the internet, in the media, and anywhere else people might address one another’s moral positions. Through these dialogues, people’s stances can shift and even form “shared moral understandings” (SMUs) that can influence policymaking. The chapter points to the change in attitudes toward environmental protection, same-sex marriage, and smoking as cases in SMU formation, and uses these and other examples to outline the process through which a SMU emerges. Finally, the chapter discusses “megalogues”—dialogues that are amplified and interlinked through multiple large groups—and the role moral dialogues in general play in community bonding and deliberating power structures.

References

  1. Akerlof, G.A., and R.J. Shiller. 2016. Phishing for phools: The economics of manipulation and deception. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Anderson, M. 2016. For Earth Day, here’s how Americans view environmental issues. Pew Research Center. Google Scholar
  3. Associated Press. 2008. In California, protests over gay marriage vote. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/10/us/10protest.html.
  4. ———. 2014. Number of gay and lesbian TV characters growing, says GLAAD.Google Scholar
  5. Auter, Z. 2016. In U.S., 73% now prioritize alternative energy over oil, gas. Gallup.Google Scholar
  6. Belluck, P. 2004. Massachusetts arrives at moment for same-sex marriage. New York Times.Google Scholar
  7. Blakely, E. 2012. In gated communities, such as where Trayvon Martin died, a dangerous mind-set. Washington Post.Google Scholar
  8. Clinton, W.J. 1996. Public papers of the Presidents of the United States, Book 2. July 1 to December 31, 1996. United States Government Printing Office. Washington: 1998, 1635.Google Scholar
  9. Cohen, B. 1963. The Press and foreign policy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Cole, D. 2016. Engines of liberty: The power of citizen activists to make constitutional law. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  11. Dockterman, E. 2015. These shows helped shape America’s attitudes about gay relationships. Time.Google Scholar
  12. Dryzek, J.S. 2008. Democratization as deliberative capacity building. Comparative Political Studies 42 (11): 1379–1402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Encyclopædia Britannica Online. 2016. Ideal type. Accessed 9 May 2016, http://www.britannica.com/topic/ideal-type.Google Scholar
  14. Etzioni, A. 1961. A comparative analysis of complex organizations. New York: Free Press of Glencoe.Google Scholar
  15. ———. 1996. The new golden rule. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  16. ———. 2007. Security first, 186–192. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  17. ———. 2011. On communitarian and global sources of legitimacy. The Review of Politics 73 (1): 123–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. ———. 2015. COIN: A study of strategic illusion. Small Wars & Insurgencies 26 (3): 345–376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Goodin, R.E. 1989. No smoking: The ethical issues. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  20. Goodwin, J., J.M. Jasper, and F. Polletta, eds. 2001. Passionate politics: Emotions and social movements. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  21. Gutmann, A. 1985. Communitarian critics of liberalism. Philosophy and Public Affairs 14 (3): 308–322.Google Scholar
  22. H.R. 3396 (104th): Defense of Marriage Act. 1996a. https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/104-1996/h316.
  23. Haidt, J. 2012. The righteous mind: Why good people are divided by politics and religion. New York: Pantheon Books.Google Scholar
  24. Hall, C. 2007. Recognizing the passion in deliberation: Toward a more democratic theory of deliberative democracy. Hypatia 22: 81.Google Scholar
  25. Hardwick, Bowers V. 2016. Chicago-Kent College of Law at Illinois Tech. Oyez., n.d. June 9. https://www.oyez.org/cases/1985/85-140.
  26. Haynes, D., and M. Birnbaum. 2008. DC tries cash as a motivator in schools. Washington Post. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/08/21/AR2008082103874.html.
  27. Hitlin, P., and S. Tan. 2012. In social media, support for same-sex marriage. Pew Research Center. Google Scholar
  28. Hitlin, P., M. Jurkowitz, and A. Mitchell. 2013. News coverage conveys strong momentum for same-sex marriage. Pew Research Center. Google Scholar
  29. Hodges, Obergefell V. 2016. Oyez. Chicago-Kent College of Law at Illinois Tech, n.d. June 9. https://www.oyez.org/cases/2014/14-556.
  30. House, E.R. 2005. Unfinished business: Causes and values. American Journal of Evaluation 22 (3): 313. Cited in: Harris, R.A. 2005. A summary critique of the fact/value dichotomy. virtualsalt.com, 2.Google Scholar
  31. Jasper, J.M. 1998. The emotions of protest: Affective and reactive emotions in and around social movements. Sociological Forum 13 (3): 397–424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Kleinman, A. 2013. How the red equal sign took over Facebook, according to Facebook’s own data. The Huffington Post.Google Scholar
  33. Kuklinski, J.H., E. Riggle, and V. Ottati. 1991. The cognitive and affective bases of political tolerance judgments. American Journal of Political Science 35: 1–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Lerner, M., and C. West. 1995. Jews and Blacks: Let the healing begin. New York: G.P. Putnam’s Sons.Google Scholar
  35. Lewis, A. 1982. The psychology of taxation. New York: St. Martin’s.Google Scholar
  36. Luker, K. 1985. Abortion and the politics of motherhood. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  37. McCarty, M. 2014. One year out, the little red logo that transformed the marriage equality narrative. Human Rights Campaign.Google Scholar
  38. Miller, J.D. 2010. Attentive public. In Encyclopedia of Science and Technology Communication, ed. S.H. Priest, 73–75. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications.  https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412959216.n27.Google Scholar
  39. Morris, A.D. 1999. A retrospective on the civil rights movement: Political and intellectual landmarks. Annual Review of Sociology 25: 517–539.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. OED. 2016. Culture, N. Oxford University Press. http://www.oed.com/view/Entry/45746?redirectedFrom=culture+war. Accessed 23 May 2016.
  41. Parekh, L.B. 2000. The future of multi-ethnic Britain: Report of the Commission on the Future of Multi-Ethnic Britain. London: Profile Books.Google Scholar
  42. Perrin, A.J. 2006. Citizen speak: The democratic imagination in American life. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  43. Pew Research Center. 2015. Gay marriage. http://www.pewresearch.org/data-trend/domestic-issues/attitudes-on-gay-marriage/.Google Scholar
  44. Prothero, S. 2016. Why the liberals win the culture wars (even when they lose elections). New York: Harper Collins.Google Scholar
  45. Schmalz, J. 1993. In Hawaii, step toward legalized gay marriage. New York Times.Google Scholar
  46. Sen, A.K. 1977. Rational fools: A critique of the behavioral foundations of economic theory. Philosophy & Public Affairs 6 (4): 317–344.Google Scholar
  47. Stein, A. 2001. Revenge of the shamed: The Christian right’s emotional culture war. In Passionate politics: Emotions and social movements, ed. J. Goodwin, J.M. Jasper, and F. Polletta. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  48. Stigler, G., and G. Becker. 1977. De gustibus non est disputandum. The American Economic Review 67 (2): 76–90.Google Scholar
  49. Thaler, R.H. 2015. Misbehaving: The making of behavioral economics. 1st ed. New York: W.W. Norton & Company.Google Scholar
  50. Thaler, R.H., and C.R. Sunstein. 2008. Nudge: Improving decisions about health, wealth, and happiness. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  51. Tönnies, F. 1955. Community and association (Gemeinschaft und gesellschaft). C.P. Loomis (Trans.). London: Routledge and Kegan Paul (Original work published 1887).Google Scholar
  52. United States V. Windsor. 2016. Oyez. Chicago-Kent College of Law at Illinois Tech, n.d. June 9, 2016. https://www.oyez.org/cases/2012/12-307.
  53. Warren, J. 2012. Should we pay kids to read? The Atlantic.Google Scholar
  54. Wilson, J.Q. 1990. Interests and deliberation in the American Republic, or why James Madison would have never received the James Madison Award. PS: Political Science and Politics, 559.Google Scholar
  55. Wrong, D.H. 1994. The problem of order: What unites and divides society. New York: The Free Press. (Original work published 1923).Google Scholar
  56. Wu, H.D., and R. Coleman. 2009. Advancing agenda-setting theory: The comparative strength and new contingent conditions of the two levels of agenda-setting. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly 86 (4): 775–789.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license and indicate if changes were made.

The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the chapter’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the chapter’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder.

Authors and Affiliations

  • Amitai Etzioni
    • 1
  1. 1.The George Washington UniversityWashington, DCUSA

Personalised recommendations