DEBATE
"Might is right"

DIALOGUE
"Connectivity for Community"
Paradigm for communicating across differences
  • Debate is oppositional: two sides oppose each other and attempt to prove each other wrong.
  • Debate assumes that there is a right answer and that someone has it.
  • In debate, personal experience is secondary to a forceful opinion.
  • ​Debate creates closed-minded attitude, a determination to be right. Individuals are considered to be autonomous and judged on individual intellectual might. 
  • Dialogue is collaborative: two or more sides work together toward common understanding.
  • In dialogue, personal experience is a key avenue for self-awareness and political understanding. 
  • In dialogue (esp. Intergroup Dialogue) exploring identities and differences are key elements in both the process and the content of the exchange. 
Self-Orientation
  • In debate, one submits one’s best thinking and defends it against challenge to show that it is right. Debate calls for investing wholeheartedly in one’s beliefs.
  • Debate defends assumptions as truth.
  • Debate defends one’s own positions as the best solution and excludes other solutions.
  • Debate affirms a participant’s own point of view. 
  • In dialogue, one submits one’s best thinking, knowing that other peoples’ reflections will help improve it rather than destroy it.
  • Dialogue calls for temporarily suspending judgments.
  • Dialogue reveals assumptions and biases for reevaluation.
  • Dialogue causes introspection on one’s own position. 
Other-Orientation
  • In debate, one listens to the other side in order to find flaws and to counter its arguments.
  • Debate causes critique of the other position.
  • In debate, one searches for glaring differences.
  • In debate, one searches for flaws and weaknesses in the other position. 
  • In dialogue, one listens to the other side(s) in order to understand, find meaning, and points of connection.
  • Dialogue involves a real concern for the other person and seeks to not alienate but yet speak what is true for oneself.
  • In dialogue, one searches for strengths in the other positions.
  • Dialogue creates an openness to learning from mistakes and biases. 
Emotions in the process
  • Debate involves a countering of the other position without focusing on feelings or relationship and often belittles or deprecates the other person. 
  • In dialogue, emotions help deepen understanding of personal, group and intergroup relationship issues. Dialogue works to uncover confusion, contradictions and paradoxes with an aim to deepen understanding. ​
End-state
  • In debate, winning is the goal.
  • ​Debate implies a conclusion. 
  • In dialogue, finding common ground is the goal. 
  • ​Dialogue remains open-ended.
Compiled and adapted by Ratnesh Nagda, Patricia Gurin, Jaclyn Rodriguez & Kelly Maxwell (2008), based on “Differentiating Dialogue from Discussion” a handout developed by Diana Kardia and Todd Sevig (1997) for the Program on Intergroup Relations, Conflict and Community (IGRC), University of Michigan; and, “Comparing Dialogue and Debate,” a paper prepared by Shelley Berman, based on discussions of the Dialogue Group of the Boston Chapter of Educators for Social Responsibility (ESR). Other members included Lucile Burt, Dick Mayo-Smith, Lally Stowell, and Gene Thompson.