DOCSLIB.ORG

The University of Chicago Communication Ethics in Social Conflict: Nonviolent and Christian Perspectives a Dissertation Submitt

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The University of Chicago Communication Ethics in Social Conflict: Nonviolent and Christian Perspectives a Dissertation Submitt THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO COMMUNICATION ETHICS IN SOCIAL CONFLICT: NONVIOLENT AND CHRISTIAN PERSPECTIVES A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF THE DIVINITY SCHOOL IN CANDIDACY FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY BY RUSSELL P. JOHNSON CHICAGO, ILLINOIS JUNE 2019 © 2019 by Russell Paul Johnson All Rights Reserved Table of Contents Acknowledgments..........................................................................................................................v Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 1 Audiences .................................................................................................................................... 5 Chapter Outline............................................................................................................................ 9 1. The Three Voices in the Ethics of Communication ............................................................. 14 I. The Etiquette of Democracy: Stephen L. Carter on Civility .................................................. 15 II. Realistic Radical: Saul Alinsky on Victory .......................................................................... 20 III. Being Just a Listener: Sally Miller Gearhart on Open-mindedness .................................... 25 IV. The Limits of Open-mindedness ......................................................................................... 30 V. The State of the Debate ......................................................................................................... 39 VI. Knights of the Double Standard: Civility’s Criticism of Victory ....................................... 41 VII. Fighting with One Hand Tied behind Your Back: Victory’s Criticism of Civility ........... 47 VIII. Comparing Civility and Victory ....................................................................................... 55 2. The Rules Are Broken: Dilemmas of Restraint in War and Social Conflict ..................... 62 I. Prescriptive Proceduralism ..................................................................................................... 64 II. The Weakness of Communication Ethics ............................................................................. 67 III. Rules of Engagement ........................................................................................................... 75 IV. Loosening Restraints ........................................................................................................... 80 V. The Parallels with Social Conflict ...................................................................................... 109 VI. The Culture War ................................................................................................................ 112 VII. Reconsidering Prescriptive Proceduralism ...................................................................... 125 VIII. Conclusion ...................................................................................................................... 131 3. Integral Communication ...................................................................................................... 133 I. Introducing Integral Communication Criticism ................................................................... 133 II. Style is Substance ............................................................................................................... 142 III. “It is Necessary to Trust”: Paulo Freire on Liberating Communication ........................... 144 IV. “All Participate and Lead”: Karlyn Kohrs Campbell on Feminist Communication ......... 153 V. Conclusion .......................................................................................................................... 159 4. Integral Communication, Part II: Søren Kierkegaard ..................................................... 161 I. Concerned Speech ................................................................................................................ 165 iii II. The Illusions of Christendom .............................................................................................. 170 III. Indirect Communication .................................................................................................... 180 5. “Dynamically Aggressive”: The Rhetorical Force of Nonviolent Direct Action ............. 210 I. Means and Ends Revisited ................................................................................................... 217 II. Two-Handed Communication ............................................................................................. 221 III. The Beloved Community................................................................................................... 231 IV. Implicit Messages .............................................................................................................. 240 6. Sharing the Good News: Integral Communication and Christian Theology .................. 273 I. “You Will Be My Witnesses”: The Ultimate End of Christian Ethics ................................ 276 II. “Good News of Great Joy for All the People”: The Logic of Christian Witness ............... 284 III. Conclusion: Speaking the Truth in Love ........................................................................... 318 iv Acknowledgments This dissertation is about constructive criticism, and it has seen its fair share. I am deeply grateful for the scholars and friends who have helped me over the last four years. My committee—Kevin Hector, Dan Arnold, James F. Conant, and Walter Jost—have been supportive and charitable. My brilliant colleagues Liz Brocius, Olivia Bustion, Jason Cather, Julius Crump, Lisa Hedrick, Hannah Jones, Elsa Marty, Adam Miller, Joe Morrison, and Mahala Rethlake read chapters and provided valuable feedback. As the project was starting to take shape, it benefited from questions and suggestions from Bevin Blaber, Scott Ferguson, Zeke Goggin, Maureen Kelly, Evan Kuehn, Jean-Luc Marion, Anil Mundra, Matt Peterson, Foster Pinkney, Bryce Rich, Hannah Roh, Yuliya Tsutserova, Matthew Vanderpoel, R.L. Watson, and Raúl Zegarra. Participants in the Emerging Scholars Workshop at the University of Virginia gave insightful suggestions. Special thanks are due to Deborah Casewell, Brandy Daniels, Janna Hunter-Bowman, Paul Dafydd Jones, Kyle Lambelet, Charles Mathewes, and Hilary Scarsella. I am likewise indebted to the Lumen Christi Institute reading group, namely Lauren Beversluis, Michael Bradley, Charlie Capps, Michael Le Chevalier, Rob Porwoll, Joseph Simmons, and Austin Walker. I cannot list all the conversations that went into this project, but my thanks go out to Ronald Arnett, Malinda Elizabeth Berry, Stanley Hauerwas, Sonam Kachru, Kris Norris, Myles Werntz, Celia Wolff, and Sameer Yadav for taking time to answer my questions. Koert Verhagen kept me from heresy, Matt Elia kept me grounded, and Lauren Greenspan kept me dialectical. Sara-Jo Swiatek kept me focused, Nathan Hardy kept me distracted, and Cherice Barr kept me alive. v A special word of gratitude is owed to David Barr. He has been my constant companion through the dissertating process, reading each chapter before it was ready to see the light of day and helping me turn frustrations into words. Writing is a team sport, and David has been an ideal teammate. The University of Chicago has been a welcoming home and employer for the last seven years. My thanks to Sara Bigger, Ryan Coyne, Josh Feigelson, Samantha Fenno, Americia Huckabee, Anne Knafl, Teresa Hord Owens, Diane Picio, Lucy Pick, Jim Robinson, Richard Rosengarten, Terren Wein, and Bruce Winkelman, to name just a few. I am also thankful for the ongoing support of Chicago Community Mennonite Church, especially the opportunity to preach parts of this dissertation as a sermon series in 2017. Celeste Groff, Paul Myers, and other participants in our book club have helped me think through many of the books cited here. Years ago, Yaakov Ariel and Randall Styers got me into this mess, and I can never thank them enough for it. I am blessed to have a family that has encouraged me at every stage in this long, strange journey. My parents, siblings, and extended family have all been in my corner since day one. Finally, I am thankful for Charissa Johnson, who proofread my footnotes (and was supportive in other ways, too). vi Introduction In this dissertation, I argue for a dialogical approach to criticism and advocacy that includes careful listening and charitable interpretation even to viewpoints one considers profoundly wrong. On this approach, the critic seeks first and foremost to understand the interlocutor’s views on their own terms, to take seriously the possibility that the interlocutor might have insights that are valuable and truthful, and then to point the way—working simultaneously with-and-against-the interlocutor—toward a different way of thinking and acting. This dialogical criticism is an effort to get beyond zero-sum “us versus them” frameworks and into a collaborative problem-solving framework. Arguments for dialogical criticism as a form of communication in social conflict, I contend, do not need to rest on abstract principles but can be based upon the specific goals and commitments of the participants in those conflicts. Many books and articles exhort readers to engage in dialogue. However, there are a variety of objections and misconceptions that prevent people from engaging
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Little Book of Restorative Justice
    The authors THE LITTLE BOOK OF oward Zehr directed the first victim offender conferencing program in the U.S. and is one H of the developers of restorative justice as a concept. His book Changing Lenses: A New Focus for Crime and Justice is considered a classic in the field. His other publications include Doing Life: Reflections of Men and Women Serving Life Sentences, Transcending: Reflections of Crime Victims and The Little Book of Restorative Justice. Forthcoming in fall, 2003, is The Little Book of Family Group Conferences, New Zealand Style (with Allan MacRae). Dr. Zehr is Co-Director of the graduate Conflict Transformation Program at Eastern Mennonite University. From this base he also teaches and practices in the field of restorative justice. Zehr received his M.A. from the University of Chicago and his Ph.D. from Rutgers University. li Gohar worked as Additional Commissioner Social Welfare Cell for Afghan Refugees for A thirteen years. Presently working as Chief Executive, Just Peace International inc. for Afghanistan and Pakistan. Ali Gohar received his MSc in International Relations from Quaid-i-Azam university Islamabad . He completed his second Master in Conflict Transformation as a Fulbright Scholar from Eastern Mennonite University VA, USA. The Pushto, Urdu and Persian (Dari) version of the hand book by the same authors are under publications. [email protected] Ph: ++92 - 91 - 5700724 The authors THE LITTLE BOOK OF oward Zehr directed the first victim offender conferencing program in the U.S. and is one H of the developers of restorative justice as a concept. His book Changing Lenses: A New Focus for Crime and Justice is considered a classic in the field.
    [Show full text]
  • Alternative North Americas: What Canada and The
    ALTERNATIVE NORTH AMERICAS What Canada and the United States Can Learn from Each Other David T. Jones ALTERNATIVE NORTH AMERICAS Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars One Woodrow Wilson Plaza 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington, D.C. 20004 Copyright © 2014 by David T. Jones All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, scanned, or distributed in any printed or electronic form without permission. Please do not participate in or encourage piracy of copyrighted materials in violation of author’s rights. Published online. ISBN: 978-1-938027-36-9 DEDICATION Once more for Teresa The be and end of it all A Journey of Ten Thousand Years Begins with a Single Day (Forever Tandem) TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction .................................................................................................................1 Chapter 1 Borders—Open Borders and Closing Threats .......................................... 12 Chapter 2 Unsettled Boundaries—That Not Yet Settled Border ................................ 24 Chapter 3 Arctic Sovereignty—Arctic Antics ............................................................. 45 Chapter 4 Immigrants and Refugees .........................................................................54 Chapter 5 Crime and (Lack of) Punishment .............................................................. 78 Chapter 6 Human Rights and Wrongs .................................................................... 102 Chapter 7 Language and Discord ..........................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • From Logic to Rhetoric: a Contextualized Pedagogy for Fallacies
    Current Issue From the Editors Weblog Editorial Board Editorial Policy Submissions Archives Accessibility Search Composition Forum 32, Fall 2015 From Logic to Rhetoric: A Contextualized Pedagogy for Fallacies Anne-Marie Womack Abstract: This article reenvisions fallacies for composition classrooms by situating them within rhetorical practices. Fallacies are not formal errors in logic but rather persuasive failures in rhetoric. I argue fallacies are directly linked to successful rhetorical strategies and pose the visual organizer of the Venn diagram to demonstrate that claims can achieve both success and failure based on audience and context. For example, strong analogy overlaps false analogy and useful appeal to pathos overlaps manipulative emotional appeal. To advance this argument, I examine recent changes in fallacies theory, critique a-rhetorical textbook approaches, contextualize fallacies within the history and theory of rhetoric, and describe a methodology for rhetorically reclaiming these terms. Today, fallacy instruction in the teaching of written argument largely follows two paths: teachers elevate fallacies as almost mathematical formulas for errors or exclude them because they don’t fit into rhetorical curriculum. Both responses place fallacies outside the realm of rhetorical inquiry. Fallacies, though, are not as clear-cut as the current practice of spotting them might suggest. Instead, they rely on the rhetorical situation. Just as it is an argument to create a fallacy, it is an argument to name a fallacy. This article describes an approach in which students must justify naming claims as successful strategies and/or fallacies, a process that demands writing about contexts and audiences rather than simply linking terms to obviously weak statements.
    [Show full text]
  • Beardsley's Theory of Analogy
    INFORMAL LOGIC XI.3, Fall 1989 Beardsley's Theory of Analogy EVELYN M. BARKER The University of Maryland 1. Is the Argument from Analogy a consequences of an "abdication of Fallacy? statesmanship."2 Kissinger cites historical analogy as the only basis for sound judg­ In the various editions of Practical Logic ment in international diplomacy: and Thinking Straight Monroe Beardsley History is the only experience on which pioneered informal logic, the assessment of statesmen can draw. But it does not teach reasoning techniques employed in actual its lessons automatically. It demonstrates the human situations. 1 Although acknowledg­ consequences of comparable situations, but ing the prominence of analogies in reason­ each generation has to determine what situa­ ing, he contended that analogy has some tions are in fact comparable. heuristic uses, but an argument based on one Such analogical arguments, as Kissinger is inherently fallacious: points out, are directed to finding suitable Analogies illustrate, and they lead to premises for wise and prudent action. hypotheses, but thinking in terms of analogy Beardsley's intellectualist approach limits becomes fallacious when the analogy is us­ rational argumentation to asserting premises ed as a reason for a principle. This fallacy as evidence for the truth of a conclusion. is called the "argument from analogy." Consequently he overlooks or misconceives (PL 107) the character of some forms of analogical Beardsley's view implies that no serious argument prevalent in practical reasoning. reasoner will use analogies between things It is misleading to speak of "the argument in drawing conclusions, or be persuaded by from analogy," as Beardsley does, as if all another's introduction of them.
    [Show full text]
  • Managing Team Chemistry
    5/8/2019 Managing Team Chemistry Managing Team Chemistry In a Nutshell I heard a baseball analyst say that the fight between Mike Piazza and Guillermo Mota last week provided a chance for Piazza's team to improve its chemistry. His rationale was pretty complex, but I think he's right. Team chemistry is a complicated issue, but it's also the key to getting the most out of a team's talent. Team chemistry is one of the most complicated keys to the success of organizations. Effective teams are more than just a collection of talented members. To be effective, a team has to be able to combine the efforts and abilities of members in the right way. Just as no two people are identical, no two teams are identical. Consequently, what works well for one team may not work well for others. However, research has identified several factors that usually produce good team chemistry: Diversity Role taking Constructive norms Leadership Cohesiveness Common vision In This Issue Mets Fight for Team Chemistry What We Know About Team Chemistry Managing Team Chemistry About the Newsletter and Subscriptions Good, Clean Joke LeaderLetter Web Site Mets Fight for Team Chemistry I heard Tim Kurkjian explain on an ESPN radio program last week that the incident of Mike Piazza charging to the pitcher's mound to fight Guillermo Mota after Mota hit him with a pitch on March 12 provided an opportunity for Piazza's team, the New York Mets, to improve their chemistry. First, Piazza is a leader on the team and his actions set the tone for the rest of the team.
    [Show full text]
  • The Argument Form “Appeal to Galileo”: a Critical Appreciation of Doury's Account
    The Argument Form “Appeal to Galileo”: A Critical Appreciation of Doury’s Account MAURICE A. FINOCCHIARO Department of Philosophy University of Nevada, Las Vegas Las Vegas, NV 89154-5028 USA [email protected] Abstract: Following a linguistic- Résumé: En poursuivant une ap- descriptivist approach, Marianne proche linguistique-descriptiviste, Doury has studied debates about Marianne Doury a étudié les débats “parasciences” (e.g. astrology), dis- sur les «parasciences » (par exem- covering that “parascientists” fre- ple, l'astrologie), et a découvert que quently argue by “appeal to Galileo” les «parasavants» raisonnent souvent (i.e., defend their views by compar- en faisant un «appel à Galilée" (c.-à- ing themselves to Galileo and their d. ils défendent leurs points de vue opponents to the Inquisition); oppo- en se comparant à Galileo et en nents object by criticizing the analo- comparant leurs adversaires aux gy, charging fallacy, and appealing juges de l’Inquisition). Les adver- to counter-examples. I argue that saires des parasavant critiquent Galilean appeals are much more l'analogie en la qualifiant de soph- widely used, by creationists, global- isme, et en construisant des contre- warming skeptics, advocates of “set- exemples. Je soutiens que les appels tled science”, great scientists, and à Galilée sont beaucoup plus large- great philosophers. Moreover, sever- ment utilisés, par des créationnistes, al subtypes should be distinguished; des sceptiques du réchauffement critiques questioning the analogy are planétaire, des défenseurs de la «sci- proper; fallacy charges are problem- ence établie», des grands scien- atic; and appeals to counter- tifiques, et des grands philosophes. examples are really indirect critiques En outre, on doit distinguer plusieurs of the analogy.
    [Show full text]
  • Circles and Analogies in Public Health Reasoning Louise Cummings
    SUMMER 2014, VOL. 29, NO. 2 35 Circles and Analogies in Public Health Reasoning Louise Cummings School of Arts and Humanities Nottingham Trent University, UK Abstract 7KHVWXG\RIWKHIDOODFLHVKDVFKDQJHGDOPRVWEH\RQGUHFRJQLWLRQVLQFH&KDUOHV+DPEOLQFDOOHG IRUDUDGLFDOUHDSSUDLVDORIWKLVDUHDRIORJLFDOLQTXLU\LQKLVERRN)DOODFLHV7KH³ZLWOHVV H[DPSOHVRIKLVIRUEHDUV´WRZKLFK+DPEOLQUHIHUUHGKDYHODUJHO\EHHQUHSODFHGE\PRUH authentic cases of the fallacies in actual use. It is now not unusual for fallacy and argumentation theorists to draw on actual sources for examples of how the fallacies are used in our everyday UHDVRQLQJ+RZHYHUDQDVSHFWRIWKLVPRYHWRZDUGVJUHDWHUDXWKHQWLFLW\LQWKHVWXG\RIWKH fallacies, an aspect which has been almost universally neglected, is the attempt to subject the fallacies to empirical testing of the type which is more commonly associated with psychological experiments on reasoning. This paper addresses this omission in research on the fallacies by examining how subjects use two fallacies – circular argument and analogical argument – during a reasoning task in which subjects are required to consider a number of public health scenarios. Results are discussed in relation to a view of the fallacies as cognitive heuristics that facilitate reasoning in a context of uncertainty. Keywords: analogical argument, circular argument, heuristic, informal fallacy, public health, reasoning, uncertainty I. Introduction puns, anecdotes, and witless examples of his forbears. The study of the fallacies has changed :KHUHSKLORVRSKLFDOUHÀHFWLRQRQWKH considerably in
    [Show full text]
  • What Are They Doing There? : William Geoffrey Gehman Lehigh University
    Lehigh University Lehigh Preserve Theses and Dissertations 1989 What are they doing there? : William Geoffrey Gehman Lehigh University Follow this and additional works at: https://preserve.lehigh.edu/etd Part of the English Language and Literature Commons Recommended Citation Gehman, William Geoffrey, "What are they doing there? :" (1989). Theses and Dissertations. 4957. https://preserve.lehigh.edu/etd/4957 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by Lehigh Preserve. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Lehigh Preserve. For more information, please contact [email protected]. • ,, WHAT ARE THEY DOING THERE?: ACTING AND ANALYZING SAMUEL BECKETT'S HAPPY DAYS by William Geoffrey Gehman A Thesis Presented to the Graduate Committee of Lehigh University 1n Candidacy for the Degree of Master of Arts 1n English Lehigh University 1988 .. This thesis 1S accepted and approved in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts. (date) I Professor 1n Charge Department Chairman 11 ACD01fLBDGBNKNTS ., Thanks to Elizabeth (Betsy) Fifer, who first suggested Alan Schneider's productions of Samuel Beckett's plays as a thesis topic; and to June and Paul Schlueter for their support and advice. Special thanks to all those interviewed, especially Martha Fehsenfeld, who more than anyone convinced the author of Winnie's lingering presence. 111 TABLB OF CONTBNTS Abstract ...................•.....••..........•.•••••.••.••• 1 ·, Introduction I Living with Beckett's Standards (A) An Overview of Interpreting Winnie Inside the Text ..... 3 (B) The Pros and Cons of Looking for Clues Outside the Script ................................................ 10 (C) The Play in Context ..................................
    [Show full text]
  • Gordon, Specious Arguments
    Specious Arguments Dr. T. David Gordon Professor of Greek, Humanities, and Religion Grove City College Introduction Although we commonly use the term “argument” to describe a rather unprofitable, angry exchange of viewpoints, the term has also been used to describe the reasons advanced for embracing a particular viewpoint. This is how I will use the term here. As such, arguments are, of course, vital to the human race. When a particular neurosurgeon “argues” for treating a given patient a given way, he or she is not being argumentative; but rather is contending for a procedure which, it is hoped, will restore the patient to health. The argument is designed to promote life. In a similar way, arguments are vital to advancing the Christian faith. Paul spoke of the “warfare” of the Christian religion in this way: “for the weapons of our warfare are not merely human, but they have divine power to destroy strongholds. We destroy arguments and every proud obstacle raised up against the knowledge of God, and we take every thought captive to obey Christ” (2 Cor. 10:4). Negatively, the Christian faith wages war against false arguments. This explains Paul’s instruction to Titus about bishops: “He must have a firm grasp of the word…, so that he may be able both to preach with sound doctrine and to refute those who contradict it” (Titus 1:9). But positively, the faith is also propagated by setting forth correct and true arguments. The apostle Peter, for instance, “…testified with many other arguments and exhorted them, saying, ‘Save yourselves from this corrupt generation’” (Acts 2:40).
    [Show full text]
  • 10 Fallacies and Examples Pdf
    10 fallacies and examples pdf Continue A: It is imperative that we promote adequate means to prevent degradation that would jeopardize the project. Man B: Do you think that just because you use big words makes you sound smart? Shut up, loser; You don't know what you're talking about. #2: Ad Populum: Ad Populum tries to prove the argument as correct simply because many people believe it is. Example: 80% of people are in favor of the death penalty, so the death penalty is moral. #3. Appeal to the body: In this erroneous argument, the author argues that his argument is correct because someone known or powerful supports it. Example: We need to change the age of drinking because Einstein believed that 18 was the right age of drinking. #4. Begging question: This happens when the author's premise and conclusion say the same thing. Example: Fashion magazines do not harm women's self-esteem because women's trust is not damaged after reading the magazine. #5. False dichotomy: This misconception is based on the assumption that there are only two possible solutions, so refuting one decision means that another solution should be used. It ignores other alternative solutions. Example: If you want better public schools, you should raise taxes. If you don't want to raise taxes, you can't have the best schools #6. Hasty Generalization: Hasty Generalization occurs when the initiator uses too small a sample size to support a broad generalization. Example: Sally couldn't find any cute clothes in the boutique and couldn't Maura, so there are no cute clothes in the boutique.
    [Show full text]
  • Attorney Well-Being: Transforming Our Workplaces Towards Better Health & Sustainability
    Friday, Nov. 8, 2019 9:15 AM – 10:30 AM Session 101 | Attorney Well-Being: Transforming Our Workplaces Towards Better Health & Sustainability Attorneys face incredible demands and pressures at work that invariably leave little room for comfort, rest, and self-care. This comes at a high cost to our own well-being. Rates of stress, anxiety, substance abuse, depression, and job dissatisfaction are alarmingly high in this profession. Unaddressed, these issues can lead to burnout, illness, and other serious outcomes. What can we do to transform ourselves and our own workplaces towards well-being and sustainability in lawyering? Come hear from a panel of fellow lawyers dedicated to the cause: the co-chair of the ABA’s National Task Force on Lawyer Well-Being and chair of the ABA’s Commission on Lawyers Assistance Programs; a published expert on attorney mindfulness and work-life integration; a distinguished in-house counsel whose passions align with attorney well-being across companies; and an experienced attorney with firsthand knowledge of managing law-firm stressors in an attempt to lead a balanced life. Moderating the panel is a former lawyer-turned-career coach dedicated to helping lawyers gain clarity and fulfillment. This is an interactive workshop. Panel and small group discussion topics will include (1) ways of regularly engaging in habits and practices to decrease stress and anxiety; (2) exploring the challenges of prioritizing well-being and how to make time for self-care; (3) causes of attorney burnout and health issues prevalent in the profession; (4) creating a workplace that prioritizes employee wellbeing; (5) how well-being initiatives help to create a more inclusive work environment; and (6) examples of workplace initiatives to improve attorney well-being.
    [Show full text]
  • Circles of Support and Accountability: the Need to Make Room for More Victim/Survivor Input
    1 Circles of Support and Accountability: The Need to Make Room for More Victim/Survivor Input Brief Bio and Program Background: The writer, David Dyck, served as the first Project Coordinator of Circles of Support and Accountability (CSA) in Winnipeg, Manitoba. CSA is a Mennonite Central Committee (MCC) initiative designed to enhance the safety of the community and reduce the risk of re-offence by released sex offenders. CSA volunteers form "Circles" who aid in the reintegration process of “Core Members” by offering them social support and encouraging them to act responsibly in the community. David has since relocated to Halifax, Nova Scotia where he continues to act as a resource person in training and consultation for CSA and other restorative justice initiatives. If you are interested in learning more about CSA, please contact: Andrea Tu or Evan Heise Mennonite Central Committee Ontario Toronto Office, 6 Trinity Square Toronto, ON M5G 1B1 Canada Ph: (416) 596-9341 Email: [email protected] You can reach the author of the article at: David Dyck 403-2540 Maynard St. Halifax, NS B3K 3V5 Canada Ph: (902) 423-1124 Email: [email protected] 1. Introduction: Prior to joining Circles of Support and Accountability (CSA) as a staff person in January, 1999, I wrote a research paper as a part of my graduate studies to familiarize myself with this relatively new Canadian initiative. While my overall assessment of CSA’s work was positive, I also made several broad suggestions regarding ways that the initiative might be improved. One of the specific issues I identified at that time was the need for CSA to seek out more concrete involvement of the victim/survivor community in the planning and carrying out of their work.
    [Show full text]