Warner summarizes (153): "Dialogue and polemic are both genres, with different ethical projects and social relations immanent to them"
Foucault (quoted on 152): "I insist on this difference as something essential: a whole morality is at stake, the morality that concerns the search for the truth and the relation to the other"
"In the serious play of questions and answers, in the work of reciprocal elucidation, the rights of each person are in some sense immanent in the discussion [...] The person asking the questions is merely exercising the right that has been given him: to remain unconvinced, to perceive a contradiction, to require more information, to emphasize different postualtes, to point our faulty reasoning, and so on"
The person answering the questions "is tied to what he has said earlier and by the acceptance of dialogue he is tied to the questioning of the other. Questions and answers depend on a game--a game that is at once pleasant and difficult--in which each of the two partners takes pains to use only the rights given him by the other and by the accepted form of the dialogue."
"The polemicist, on the other hand, proceeds encased in privileges that he possess in advance and will never agree to question. [...] the person he confronts is not a partner in the search for truth but an adversary, an enemy who is wrong, who is harmful, and whose very existence constitutes a threat. For him, then, the game consists not of recognizing this person as a subject having the right to speak but of abolishing him, as interlocutor, from any possible dialogue."