Dialogy and the possible dialogue
31
Jul
The term was treated by Baktin and Martin Buber, and therefore can overcome ideological barriers linked to the first, was a Marxist, and religious linked to the second, who was a Jew interested in religious matters, but fundamentally an educator.
Finally we can remember Paulo Freire for whom dialogue was essential in the educational process, and thus verify that there is in human nature a possible way in contrasts, contrasts and clashes.
To explain this reliade, Buber come a way revealing that between a man and another, something called zwischenmenschlich (or among men or the inter-human), it the truth takes on a body and therefore real dimension.
In this sphere interhuman an essential characteristic is spontaneity, and it all looks or “deception” would be fatal in authentic dialogue the Other says as what it really is and is confirmed by their nature, and this becomes dialogical.
Buber for the modern man, is combining its existence in the unidirectional relationship between the Self (self ego) and a manipulable object (this), countered this a US-TU name of your book and for him “who lives only with This is not a man “(Buber, 1977, p. 39), but This can be anything” ideal “that is any” Something. ”
To Baktin, the world is peopled with voices of other people, and these voices are the words with the senses ‘statements’, I try every direction of the world through other people’s words, and this acquisition of speech is allowing me to purchase all the treasures of cultural (Baktin, 1969, p. 347).
As Buber also for him, the “I” exists only insofar as it is related to a “you” that “be means to communicate with,” and “I” is someone who goes to a “thou “and what happens between us, between” you “and” I “, is an event of” being, “a” “eventBeing “, an open dynamic fact that you have to question character and response at the same time.
BAJTÍN, M.M. Estética de la creación verbal [en ruso]. Moscú: Iskusstvo, 1979.
