Civil discourse

This article has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page. (Learn how and when to remove these template messages) The examples and perspective in this article may not represent a worldwide view of the subject. You may improve this article, discuss the issue on the talk page, or create a new article, as appropriate. (October 2022) (Learn how and when to remove this message) This article's lead section may be too short to adequately summarize the key points. Please consider expanding the lead to provide an accessible overview of all important aspects of the article. (April 2023) (Learn how and when to remove this message)

^[1][2]Civil discourse refers to respectful conversation aimed at fostering understanding and constructive communication, where individuals within a group share different perspectives, enhancing the learning experience.^[3][4] It can also refer to the practice of deliberating about things that are of concern to society in a way that seeks to help all participants to understand.^[5] It is an essential part of democratic citizenship and is thus a fundamental aspect of freedom of speech, characterized by dialogue that supports the societal good."^[6] Members of the U.S. Supreme Court session in 2011 aptly described civil discourse as "robust, honest, frank and constructive dialogue and deliberation that seeks to advance the public interest."^[7] Arguments are grounded in reason and evidence, adhering to strict guidelines for the appropriate behavior to be practiced.^[8] In contrast, uncivil discourse contains direct insults, unwarranted attributions of motive, and open contempt."^[9]

Civil discourse is the aspect of democratic citizenship that Universities aim to promote. Universities are able to enjoy the rights and protections they do because it is understood that they are essential to promote learning and knowledge expansion.

Civil discourse requires mature individuals capable of rational and autonomous thinking.^[10] It requires that individuals are able to critically analyze their own values and beliefs, pitting them against the good of society. Engaging in civil discourse broadens one's horizons, creating a more inclusive atmosphere. It is the responsibility of all members of society to actively participate in productive and respectful discourse, as this practice dismantles the rigidity of oppression and fosters a mental space where society's true nature and potential can be recognized.^[11]

One common misconception about civil discourse is that it necessitates the avoidance of conflicts. Some erroneously equate civil communication with excessive politeness. However, civil discourse does not demand people-pleasing; rather, it encourages effective discussion over heated disagreements. It is not about always holding back to avoid differing opinions. It is not about constantly restraining differing opinions but rather embracing conflicts to objectively understand a subject.^[12]

Within countries which value and uphold freedom of speech, civil discourse is believed to enhance objectives and ideas. However in many other countries it may be valued to varying degrees. Historically, we cannot see many examples of civil discourse within authoritarian governments such as Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union, or Maoist China. In these societies civil discourse was heavily discouraged including by violence, torture, or excommunication. Within the United States during McCarthyism there was a lack of open debate regarding topics which were taboo at the time such as Communism and homosexuality.