2015 | 18 | 149-176
Article title

Mutuality and Intersubjective Dialogue in Religious Education

Title variants
Wzajemność i międzypodmiotowy dialog w edukacji religijnej
Languages of publication
Intentional mutuality and intersubjective dialogue woven into the pedagogy of youth and adults is a radical idea in any educational setting; however in the case of religious education it can provide a generative, hermeneutic, learning platform for the development of Christocentric living (as one example). Through so doing, this learning platform can easily extend into the postmodern secular sphere to temper and balance its epistemic forms with hermeneutics, ethics, empathy, and social justice. Where religious education can remain free of the control of neoliberal ideology, it can help students flourish in their humanity and agency. At the same time, religious education and critical pedagogies can be further developed on the shoulders of their giants with gleanings from the secular world—practices and methods from a range of human traditions. In that spirit, the author borrows substantial elements from his previous work (Shuster 2006) on the effectiveness of dialogue and intersubjectivity in postmodern workgroups and speculates on its utility to learning groups and classrooms.
Celowa wzajemność i międzypodmiotowy dialog, wplecione w pedagogię młodzieży i dorosłych, stanowi radykalną ideę w dziedzinie edukacji. W przypadku edukacji religijnej może to oznaczać organizację generatywnej i hermeneutycznej platformy nauczania, służącej rozwijaniu chrystocentrycznego modelu życia (jako jednego z przykładów). W ten sposób platforma ta może łatwo się rozszerzać, wkraczając na obszar ponowoczesny i świecki, łagodząc i równoważąc przy tym jego epistemiczne formy hermeneutyką, etyką, empatią i sprawiedliwością społeczną. Tam, gdzie edukacja religijna pozostaje wolna od kontroli ze strony neoliberalnej ideologii, tam może pomóc uczniom w rozwoju ich człowieczeństwa i aktywności. W tym samym czasie edukacja religijna oraz krytycznie ukierunkowane pedagogie mogą być rozwijane przez ich głównych orędowników, zbierając przy tym doświadczenia również ze świeckiego świata, tj. praktyki i metody reprezentujące rozmaite tradycje. Podążając za tym przykładem, autor przejmuje znaczące elementy ze swej wcześniejszej pracy (Shuster 2006) na temat skuteczności dialogu i międzypodmiotowości w ponowoczesnych grupach pracowniczych i zastanawia się nad ich przydatnością w grupach osób uczących się oraz podczas zajęć w klasie szkolnej.
Physical description
  • Action Science Network, What is Action Science?, 2005, Available at: <>.
  • Argyris C., Knowledge for Action: A Guide to Overcoming Barriers to Organizational Change, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco 1993.
  • Argyris C., Putnam R., McLain Smith D., Action Science, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco 1985.
  • Argyris C., Schön D.A., Organizational Learning II: Theory, Method, and Practice, Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA 1996.
  • Athens L., “Mead’s Lost Conception of Society”, Symbolic Interaction 2005, Summer, vol. 28, no. 3, pp. 305–325.
  • BeFriender Ministry, BeFriender Ministry Coordinator Manual, St. Paul Press, St. Paul 1997.
  • Bohm D., Unfolding Meaning. Routledge, New York 1985.
  • Bohm D., On Dialogue, ed. L. Nichol, revised edition, Routledge, London 1996.
  • Bolton H., “Managers Develop Moral Accountability: The Impact of Socratic Dialogue”, The Journal of Philosophy of Management 2001, vol. 1, no. 3. Available at: <>.
  • Bower B., “Goal-Oriented Brain Cells: Neurons May Track Action as a Prelude to Empathy”, Science News 2005, April 30, no. 167(18), pp. 273–288.
  • Bower B., “Mirror Cells Fading Spark: Empathy Related Neurons May Turn off in Autism”, Science News 2005, December 10, no. 168(24), pp. 370–383.
  • Bråten S., “Participant Perception of Others’ Acts: Virtual Otherness in Infants and Adults”, Culture and Psychology 2003, vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 261–276.
  • Brown V., Tumeo M., Larey T.S., Paulus P.B., “Modeling Cognitive Interactions during Group Brainstorming”, Small Group Research 1998, no. 4. Available at: <>.
  • Buber M., I and Thou, transl. R.G. Smith, Charles Scribner’s Sons, New York 1937.
  • Buber M., On Intersubjectivity and Cultural Creativity, ed. S.N. Eisenstadt, University of Chicago Press, Chicago 1992.
  • Coelho N.E., Figueiredo L.C., “Patterns of Intersubjectivity in the Constitution of Subjectivity: Dimensions of Otherness”, Culture and Psychology 2003, vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 193–208.
  • Cooperrider D.L., Srivastva S., “Appreciative Inquiry in Organizational Life”, Research in Organizational Change and Development 1987, vol. 1, pp. 129–169.
  • Cooper-White P., Shared Wisdom: Use of the Self in Pastoral Care and Counseling, Augsburg Fortress, Minneapolis 2004.
  • Crossley N., Intersubjectivity: The Fabric of Social Becoming, Sage, London 1996.
  • Dennen V.P., “Cognitive Apprenticeship in Educational Practice: Research on Scaffolding, Modeling, Mentoring, and Coaching as Instructional Strategies”, in: Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technology, ed. D.H. Jonassen, 2nd edition, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers, Mahwah, NJ 2004. Available at: <>.
  • De Quincey C., Radical Knowing: Understanding Consciousness through Relationship, Park Street, Rochester, VT 2005.
  • Donohoe J., Husserl on Ethics and Intersubjectivity: From Static to Genetic Phenomenology, Humanity Books, Amherst, NY 2004.
  • Dougiamas M., A Journey Into Constructivism, 1998, November. Available at: <>.
  • Freire P., Pedagogy of Hope, Continuum, London 1994.
  • Gatto J.T., Weapons of Mass Instruction: A Schoolteacher’s Journey Through the Dark World of Compulsory Schooling, New Society Publishers, Gabriola Island, BC 2008.
  • Gallese V., “The Roots of Empathy: The Shared Manifold Hypothesis and the Neural Basis of Intersubjectivity”, Psychopathology 2003, vol. 36, pp. 171–180.
  • Giroux H.A., “Terrorizing Students: The Criminalization of Children in the US Police State”, Truthout (online). 2015, November 11. Available at: <>.
  • Grady H.H., Wells S., “Toward a Rhetoric of Intersubjectivity: Introducing Jürgen Habermas”, Journal of Advanced Composition 1985, June, 6. Available at: <>.
  • Gubrium J.F., Holstein J.A., “Analyzing Interpretive Practice”, in: Handbook of Qualitative Research, eds. N.K. Denzin, Y.S. Lincoln, 2nd edition, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA 1994, pp. 487–508.
  • Hamilton E., Cairns H. (eds.), Plato: Collected Dialogues. Bollinger Series LXXI, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ 1969.
  • Illich I., Tools for Conviviality, Heyday Books, Berkeley 1973.
  • Issacs W., Dialogue and the Art of Thinking Together: A Pioneering Approach to Communicating in Business and in Life, Doubleday, New York 1999.
  • Katzenbach J.R., Smith D.K., The Wisdom of Teams: Creating the High Performance Organization, Harvard Business School Press, Boston 1993.
  • Lave J., Wenger E., Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation, Cambridge University Press, New York 1991.
  • Levi R.A., “Group Magic: An Inquiry into Experiences of Collective Resonance”, Reflections 2005, vol. 6, no. 2/3, pp. 19–27.
  • McCullough D., “Knowing History and Knowing Who We Are” (Abridged transcript of remarks delivered February 15, 2005 in Phoenix, AZ), Imprimis 2005, April, vol. 34, no. 4, pp. 1–7.
  • Nelson L., Socratic Method and Critical Philosophy: Selected Essays, transl. T.K. Brown, Yale University Press, New Haven 1949.
  • Nichol L., “Forward”, in: D. Bohm, On Dialogue, ed. L. Nichol, revised edition, Routledge, London 1996.
  • Prus R.C., Symbolic Interaction and Ethnographic Research: Intersubjectivity and the Study of Human Lived Experience, SUNY Press, Albany, NY 1996.
  • Remen R.N., “In the Service of Life”, Noetic Sciences Review 1996, Spring, no. 37, pp. 24–25.
  • Sahadat J., “A Swidlerian and Jain Prolegomenon to Dialogue”, Journal of Ecumenical Studies 1997, September 22, vol. 34, no. 4 pp. 531–550.
  • Shapiro E., “Intersubjectivity in Archaic and Mature Twinship in Group Therapy”, in: Self-Experiences in Group: Intersubjective and Self-Psychological Pathways to Human Understanding, eds. N.H. Harwood, M. Pines, Jessica Kingsley Publishers, London 1998, pp. 47–57.
  • Shotter J., Why Being Dialogical Must Come Before Being Logical: the Need for a Hermeneutical-Dialogical Approach to Robotic Activities (Online post). 2015, April 7. Available at: <>.
  • Shuster D.J., The Confluence of Intersubjectivity and Dialogue in Postmodern Organizational Workgroups (unpublished master’s thesis), Concordia University, St. Paul 2006.
  • Stacey R.D., “Organizations as Complex Responsive Processes of Relating”, Innovative Management 2003, vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 27–39.
  • Sweeten G., Ping D.W., Sweeten G.R., Listening for Heaven’s Sake, Equipping Ministries International, Cincinnati, OH 1993.
  • Torbert W.R., and Associates, Action Inquiry: the Secret of Timely and Transforming Leadership, Berrett-Koehler, San Francisco 2004.
  • Vygotsky L.S., Mind in Society: the Development of Higher Psychological Processes, eds. M. Cole, V. John-Steiner, S. Scribner, E. Souberman, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA 1978.
  • Wade N., “Exploring a Hormone for Caring”, New York Times 2005, November 22. Retrieved from <>.
  • Wellmon C., “Sacred Reading: From Augustine to the Digital Humanists”, Hedgehog Review 2015, vol. 17, no. 3, pp. 70–85.
  • Wheeler G., Intersubjectivity: A New Way of Thinking about Evolutionary Theory, 2000, November. Unpublished conference summary of Evolutionary Theory: An Esalen Invitational Conference.
  • Wierciński A. (ed.), Between the Human and the Divine: Philosophical and Theological Hermeneutics, International Institute for Hermeneutics, Hermeneutic Series, vol. 1, The Hermeneutic Press, Toronto 2002.
Document Type
Publication order reference
YADDA identifier
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.