The article starts with an analysis of the causes of the crisis of truth in the contemporary world. The author emphasizes that a dialog is only possible when the classical (epistemic, logical), and at the same time commonsensical definition of the truth is assumed; one that understands the truth as ‘adequacy of the thought and reality’. One cannot have a dialog if he accepts the coherence, consensual, pragmatic or convention definition of the truth. A good deal of attention in the article is devoted to the issue of the truth of the utterance. The problem of truthfulness is emphasized, as a basic principle of a dialog, and the reader’s attention is drawn to various kinds of departing from the truth of the utterance: intellectual – mistake, error, falsehood, and moral – lie, half-truth, concealment, exaggeration, masking utterance, fraud and stratagem, gossip or over-interpretation. In the question of the truth both its essential (what contents there are in the truth) and existential (what meaning for our life these contents have) aspect is important. Hence, one always should pay attention not only to the information role of the truth (it is the source of knowledge), but also to its wisdom function (it teaches the art of life). Discovering and understanding the truth in a dialog serves both appreciating “the value of life” (learning its sense) and perfecting the “quality of life”.
The article takes up the idea of beauty in the dialogue. The starting point is the problem of the transcendental issue of truth, goodness and beauty. Considering the subject of beauty in terms of dialogue, first attention is drawn to the role of beauty in the dialogue itself. Then, the main themes of the dialogue about beauty are presented. Subsequently, the beauty of the dialogue itself is shown revealing in subjective terms the abundance of values of the epiphany of the face and the whole drama of interpersonal encounter.
The article discusses the issue of the atmosphere of dialog and its influence on the course of the dialog process. The atmosphere is first of all created by people, and this is why in the first part of the article it is shown, taking the personalistic approach, what emotional mood, intellectual aura and spiritual atmosphere are favorable for having a dialog. On the emotional side it is enthusiasm, surges of emotions, and sublimity; in the intellectual aspect it is objectivism, pragmatism and acting logically; and in the volitionary-spiritual dimension – it is acceptance of people, tolerance and kindness. In the further part of the article attention is paid to the subjective and objective factors creating a dialog. The following ones belong here: pro-social education and self-education, a positive influence of public opinion, and on the objective side: some global civilization trends, and the communication revolution in the world, owing to which not only did tools for indirect inter-personal relations (the press, radio, television, Internet) gain importance, but also direct inter-personal communication did. In the third part of the article the means used for building the atmosphere of dialogue are discussed. The status of natural behaviors should be appreciated here: politeness, simplicity and understanding; and defective behaviors, like obsequiousness, pompousness, crudeness and leniency should be eliminated. It is also indispensable to look for the way of the golden mean between extreme behaviors. Such a way between oversensitiveness and callousness is – sensitivity; between euphoric behavior and fatalism – realism, and between doctrinairism and utilitarianism – humanism. The article is closed by the conclusion that the atmosphere of dialog influences the dynamics of the dialog processes, determining priority goals in the dialog and stimulating further dialogs.
JavaScript jest wyłączony w Twojej przeglądarce internetowej. Włącz go, a następnie odśwież stronę, aby móc w pełni z niej korzystać.