Metagovernance and the Possibility of Dialogue in Metropolitan Regions: Insights from the Philosophies of Hermeneutics, Deconstruction, and Genealogy

The concept of dialogue stands as one of the central pillars within the discourses of governance and metagovernance. In the context of metropolitan regions, governance and metagovernance processes lose their substantive meaning in the absence of dialogue. Despite its fundamental significance, the realization of dialogue is profoundly complex, and the practical attainment of its objectives as theoretically envisioned proves far from straightforward. This paper seeks to critically assess the complicate nature of dialogue within the context of metagovernance in metropolitan regions through a comparative analysis of three distinct philosophical traditions: hermeneutics, deconstruction, and genealogy. From the standpoint of hermeneutics, dialogue cannot culminate in mutual understanding or a shared understanding, as language itself is inherently pluralistic. Within the dialogical process, rather than achieving a singular, universally accepted meaning, what emerges is a multiplicity of meanings shaped by divergent interpretations. Genealogy, by contrast, posits that dialogue between heterogeneous social forces affiliated with different discourses is fundamentally impossible since each social force interprets and constructs the meaning of the metropolitan space through the lens of its own discourse, rendering alternative interpretations unintelligible and illegitimate. From the perspective of deconstruction approach, the very possibility of dialogue among diverse social forces within a metropolitan region collapses altogether. The language and signs employed by different social forces in the process of dialogue are in themselves meaningless.

کلیدواژه ها:

Dialogue ، Hermeneutics ، Deconstruction ، Genealogy ، Metropolitan Regions