Introduction: John Dewey and the Public Sphere

Abstract

Assessments of John influence in communication discipline have paralleled, in some respects, assessments of vitality of public sphere--one can tell a story of rise and fall. During formative years of discipline, scholarship exerted a strong influence. In his history of speech discipline, Herman Cohen concludes that the dominant influence of John Dewey, and particularly of his How We Think of 1910, became evident very early and continued throughout 20s, 30s and 40s (1994, p. 320). In particular, his writings on reflective thinking informed emerging inquiries into processes of group discussion. Argument scholars were among those interested in group discussion, explains William Keith, in part because of a growing dissatisfaction with practice of collegiate debate, which some viewed as overly competitive, lacking principle, and disconnected from practices of citizenship. Regarding discussion as a cooperative problem-solving activity that enabled a civic pedagogy, some argument scholars embraced as a theorist of democracy and social agency who made communication practices, rather than institutional settings, definitive (2002). Yet widespread influence produced, in view of Cohen, an almost adherence (p. 321) to his concept of reflective thinking in early years of field. In ensuing decades, perceptions of diminished interest in his scholarship prompted a series of articles urging scholars to (re)turn to Dewey. Contributors to a 1968 special issue of Western exploring The Influence of John Upon Speech wondered why no one cited Dewey. Most incredulous was Don Burks, whose claim that no philosopher since Aristotle has more to offer rhetorician than John Dewey (1968, p. 126) accentuated strange dearth of references to in communication publications. In a more restrained tone, Gladys Borchers noted that while concerns resonated with those of discipline's founders, is obvious that in attempting to determine influence of John on speech education, it is difficult to find a direct relationship (1968, p. 129). Fifteen years later, in an article exploring contributions of view of communication to a rhetorical cultivation of character and practical wisdom, Christopher Lyle Johnstone, quoting Burks' reference to Aristotle, reiterated that Dewey's work remains largely unexamined by contemporary theorists and philosophers of rhetoric (1983, pp. 185-186). As an alternative to a typos of unjustified neglect, one may characterize this narrative as exhibiting a kind of forgetfulness. From one perspective, forgetfulness of influence in early years of communication disciple substantiates concerns expressed above, for familiarity developed through sustained contact may have benefited a growing disciple. Yet, perhaps we should not bemoan forgetfulness if our remembering of enables a reinvention of Dewey, that is, if we approach his writings with an interest in illuminating contemporary concerns. This aim, which has been pursued variously by contributors to this special issue, is well-justified by scholarship. believed that intellectuals could not discover timeless and universal truths. Rather, he exhorted that critical inquiry should be geared towards helping citizens understand and respond to political and social issues of their day (1920/1948, pp. 25-26). To advance this aim, we ought to avoid hyperbole or what Cohe n characterized as slavish adherence. Instead, we ought to heed John Durham Peters' assessment of significance for communication scholars: His thought is not scripture to be venerated but a stock of ideas to be applied where useful (1988, p. 309; see also Carey, 1988, p. 14). Contributors to this special issue engage scholarship in light of contemporary public sphere studies. …