As long as a discussion is respectful, constructive, open, and fair, we think it qualifies as “civil”—and worth having. At the same time, keep in mind that there are different types of civil discussion, typically labeled in different ways.
Photo by bookfinch 
“Discussion,” “discourse,” “dialogue,” and “deliberation” may all sound like the same thing, and on some very general level, that is true. But there is huge variety among them (and their variants) in practice, based on their particular purposes, processes, and products—so much variety, in fact, that there are now numerous catalogues, or typologies, that have been created to make sense of them all.
One of the most helpful (and simplest) of these descriptions of discussion types is published by a group called the National Coalition for Dialogue and Deliberation (NCDD) made up of scholars and practitioners of civic engagement. Called “Streams of Practice,” NCDD divides discussions into four basic types, the first three of which are part of EnCiv’s long term plans:
- Exploration (often called “dialogue”
- Decision making (often called “deliberation”)
- collaborative action
- conflict transformation.
Although I would suggest that these are better viewed as points along a spectrum than as hard and fast categories, I highly recommend NCDD’s guide as a starting point.
*Adapted from Adolf G. Gundersen and Suzanne Goodney Lea, Let’s Talk Politics: Restoring Civility Through Exploratory Discussion, Appendix I
Photo by bookfinch
