In 1986 Stringfellow Barr, an historian and president of St John's College in Maryland, wrote a Socratic critique of American discourse: "There is a pathos in television dialogue: the rapid exchange of monologues that fail to find the issue, like ships passing in the night; the reiterated preface, 'I think that...,' as if it mattered who held the opinion rather than which opinion is worth holding; the impressivepersonal vanity that prevents each 'discussant' from really listening to another speaker."

Socrates' alternative was "good" conversation or dialectic. To converse originally meant to turn towaeds one another, in order to find a common humanity and to move closer to the truth of something. Dialectic, in other words, is decidely not about winning or losing, because all the conversants are ennobled by it. It is a joint search. Unfortunately, as Mr Barr put it, it is also "the most difficult" kind of conversation "especially for Americans to achieve."

- The Economist