اندیشهفلسفهخردگفتگوحکمتمعناپرسشفرهنگ
“Dialogue Against Dialogue”; Mohammad Mehdi Mojahedi argues that belief in the need for a shared framework, tolerance, or agreement on terms is what makes dialogue impossible. He sees dialogue as a problem-solving act that is possible only without prejudice and preconception.

A lecture by Mohammad Mehdi Mojahedi titled "Dialogue Against Dialogue" was held on Monday, December 30, 2019, at the Imam Musa Sadr Cultural and Research Institute. Mohammad Mehdi Mojahedi began his lecture by posing three questions to the audience:
· Does dialogue require a common framework between its parties?
· Is dialogue feasible without tolerance?
· Must the parties to a dialogue agree on the conditions of dialogue and its concepts?
He then, while examining the participants' responses, continued his explanations as follows: Each of the three aforementioned beliefs creates conceptions of dialogue that render dialogue impossible. Dialogue is beneficial in the absence of these three conditions, and we need it. We should not begin dialogue from a common framework, for it is neither a condition of its possibility nor a condition of its perfection. Dialogue is not any kind of speech act; rather, it is a specific speech act. A speech act that is reduced to problem-solving. A problem that does not require reaching common ground. Even if we consider the other party as part of the problem statement. In dialogue, the parties possess insight into themselves and the other, and beyond this, possess insight into the content exchanged between them. Absence of bigotry, absence of prejudice, absence of argument-avoidance, and so on, are among the conditions of dialogue. There is a difference between the outcomes of dialogue and its conditions. He then proceeded to explain the concept of tolerance and forbearance and the difference between these two concepts...
.
.
.
.
Philosophy
Religion
Philosophy
Religion
Philosophy
Discussion2 comments
درود و ادب سخنرانی بسیار مفید و ارزندهای بود. فقط در بخش انتهایی و پاسخ به پرسش شنوندگان، برخی پاسخها سرهمبندیکردن بود و نیاز به پاسخ دقیقتری داشت.
جامع و کامل بود. باتشکر..