Listening Otherwise: The Voice of Ethics

Lipari, Lisbeth

doi:10.1080/10904010802591888

Cited by 44 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Shotter (2009) and Lipari (2009Lipari ( , 2010 remind us that the words to see, sight, and seeing are connected to listening. The listener who also sees will notice that various spoken words "touch" the speaker to such an extent that one can see them being "moved" by their own words (Shotter).…”

mentioning

confidence: 94%

“…Ethical inquiries tend to focus too much on what is being heard and miss the fact that listening has its own meaning. Lipari (2009Lipari ( , 2010 suggests that hearing derives from a root that emphasizes the perception and sensation of sound, while listening etymologically comes from a root that emphasizes attention and giving to another human being. The etymology illustrates that the verbs listen and hear are inflected with different meanings that suggest different ways of being in the world.…”

mentioning

confidence: 98%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Listening to the Otherness of the Other: Envisioning Listening Based on a Hermeneutical Reading of Lévinas

Koskinen

Lindström

2013

International Journal of Listening

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

mentioning

confidence: 94%

mentioning

confidence: 98%

Listening to the Otherness of the Other: Envisioning Listening Based on a Hermeneutical Reading of Lévinas

Koskinen

Lindström

2013

International Journal of Listening

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…A number of participants showed that they were comfortable and by the communicative action, they could help each other to see extended views. In line with Lipari (2009), the ethical response is about speaking and listening. To respond to one another, we first have to come close and listen because other people are always different from ourselves and impossible to completely understand.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Communicative and organizational aspects of clinical ethics support

Grönlund

Söderberg

Dahlqvist

et al. 2018

Journal of Interprofessional Care

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Studies show that healthcare professionals need inter-professional clinical ethics support (CES) in order to communicate and reflect on ethically difficult care situations that they experience in their clinical practice. Internationally, various CES interventions have been performed, but the communication processes and organisation of these interventions are rarely described in detail. The aim of this study was to explore communicative and organisational conditions of a CES intervention with the intention of promoting inter-professional communication about ethically difficult care situations. Eight audio-and video-recorded inter-professional CES sessions, inspired by Habermas' theory of communicative actions, were conducted. The observations were transcribed, sorted, and analysed using concept-and datadriven content analysis methods. The findings show three approaches to promoting communicative agreement, which include the CES facilitators' and participants' approaches to promoting a permissive communication, extended views, and mutual understanding. The CES sessions had organizational aspects for facilitating communicative agreement with both a given structure and openness for variation. The dynamic structure of the organization, promoted both safety and stability as well as a creativity and responsiveness, which in turn opened up for a free and dynamic inter-professional dialogue concerning ethically difficult care situations. The findings constitute a step towards a theory-based CES method inspired by Habermas' theory of communicative action. Further research is needed in order to fully develop the method and obtain increased knowledge about how to promote an interprofessional dialogue about ethically difficulties.

show abstract

“…To exist as a listening being, therefore, means to perceive multiple layers of Mediation (Thirdness) in such a way that improves the capability to react to others (Secondness) and thereby bring about desirable aesthetic qualities in an event (Firstness). As such, listening “is a profoundly difficult way of being in the world because it by necessity disrupts the sameness and familiarity of the always already known” (Lipari, , p. 45).…”

Section: Hearing Listening and Sensingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Listening, Hearing, Sensing: Three Modes of Being and the Phenomenology of Charles Sanders Peirce

Bodie

Crick

2014

Commun Theor

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article accepts Lipari's invitation to continue rethinking communication along the lines of artful listening as understood through the lens of phenomenology. However, we trace out the implications following a different phenomenological tradition than the one stemming from the German tradition of Heidegger and Husserl—specifically, the phenomenology of Charles Sanders Peirce, who allows us to see listening differently and perhaps more clearly. The primary contribution from Peirce's phenomenology is the logos he uses to extract 3 fundamental categories of thought and nature: Firstness (Quality), Secondness (Relation), and Thirdness (Mediation). As we shall show, listening is characterized by a plural consciousness sensitive to Mediation as it reveals itself through Relation and Quality.

show abstract

Listening Otherwise: The Voice of Ethics

Cited by 44 publications

References 15 publications

Listening to the Otherness of the Other: Envisioning Listening Based on a Hermeneutical Reading of Lévinas

Listening to the Otherness of the Other: Envisioning Listening Based on a Hermeneutical Reading of Lévinas

Communicative and organizational aspects of clinical ethics support

Listening, Hearing, Sensing: Three Modes of Being and the Phenomenology of Charles Sanders Peirce

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About