When the topic of dialogue arises, what often comes to mind are everyday conversations, media interviews, political meetings, and even social media exchanges. And yet, dialogue in its true sense goes far beyond these superficial forms. When we speak of authentic dialogue, we refer to its meaningful human dimension—its intrinsic value. True dialogue is distinct from argument, suppression, or the discrediting of others. It begins with a genuine exchange and is guided by reason and truth. As Hans-Georg Gadamer writes in Truth and Method, in a true dialogue, both parties open themselves to one another, sincerely regard the other’s words as valid, and place themselves in the other’s position. Now, ask yourself: have we ever conducted our dialogues in this spirit? Have we even been capable of doing so?
In his treatise On the Way to Language, Martin Heidegger considers “showing” to be an essential function of language, suggesting that we are, in essence, revealed through our words and speech. Our real selves are reflected in the actions and reactions we display, both online and offline. The everyday habits of TikTok and other virtual platforms expose a form of communication built on flawed and misplaced foundations. These are not dialogues but efforts to humiliate and isolate the other—conversations that reflect who we truly are, but lead nowhere meaningful or constructive. At first glance, this behavior may seem like an emotional outlet or a way to release frustration. Still, beneath the surface, the participants often secretly hope for a more positive and respectable outcome.
Ludwig Wittgenstein placed deep importance on understanding in dialogue. He believed that every domain has its own “language games” and specific vocabulary for making sense of the world. Therefore, when we seek to engage in dialogue with someone from another field or worldview, we must first learn the language game of that domain. The problem with our dialogues—from the mundane to the so-called high-level—is that we either lack understanding, the ability to make ourselves understood, or the honesty required for meaningful exchange. This is why, in our society, the door to genuine dialogue has long remained shut. And when the door to dialogue is closed, so too is the world—it remains unknown, inaccessible. But if we could engage in dialogue across various domains and perspectives, it would mean that many worlds could become available to us. As Gadamer suggests, it is through dialogue that we can inhabit a world at all.
Beyond this, the ruling political elite—or more aptly, the “political functionaries”—consistently obstruct the possibility of genuine, productive dialogue. They routinely shut down opportunities for open discourse with hollow platitudes: “We are one nation,” “We are all Muslims,” “We are brothers,” “We stood united against foreign invasions,” “The people do not quarrel; it is we who create problems,” or “We must not make statements that undermine national unity.” Such ceremonial, fact-void rhetoric is a smokescreen—a deliberate deflection. These evasions reveal a deep-seated fear: a fear of dialogue. In authentic dialogue, as Gadamer explains in Truth and Method, we are not in control of the process; rather, we are thrown into it, and it is the dialogue itself that guides us. This is precisely what frightens these political actors. Their fear stems from the lies of the past—lies they believe can sustain ethnic dominance, extend a presumed identity, or preserve their grip on current territorial arrangements. These irrational fears have robbed the people and the country of every opportunity. They understand, to some extent, that once genuine dialogue begins, they will no longer be in charge—the realities of the country will take the lead. And so, they have always found ways to prevent it from taking shape.
Another reason for their dishonesty in dialogue is their lack of freedom. The foundations of the country’s modern geography were laid by the British and the Russians, designed to serve specific imperial objectives—and to this day, there is no willingness to reconsider or reimagine those foundations. In short, what hinders dialogue is the absence of freedom, sincerity, and understanding.
This fear of dialogue is not limited to political functionaries. It is also widespread among academics, self-proclaimed intellectuals, and specialists in other fields. Even within these circles, avoidance and fear of meaningful dialogue are common.
A society that cannot engage in dialogue, or groups of people who are unable to speak with one another, has a bleak future. Everything in such societies remains unresolved. In contrast, communities and groups that succeed in dialogue at least identify shared ground and use it to free themselves from conflict and paralysis. Our fear of dialogue distances us from truly knowing one another, leaving us perpetually distrustful, alienated, and suspicious.
True dialogue, of course, demands patience and capacity. It requires goodwill, acceptance of others, reason, compassion, and above all, freedom. And yet, despite these demands, there is only one path forward: to commit to dialogue. A dialogue in which there are no taboos, no red lines for expressing ideas, and in which every issue is weighed and a final resolution is reached.
You can read the Persian version of this analysis here:
