Rhetorical Analysis on Deborah Tannen's Argument Culture

In the article “Taking a ‘War of Words’ Too Literally”, Deborah Tannen defines “argument culture”, as “the best way to get anything done”. Debating is when “Issues are routinely approached by having two sides stake out opposing positions and do battle. This sometimes drives people to take positions that are more adversarial than they feel-and can get

Conflict is inevitable in any personal relationship or among members of any group. While we encounter many types of conflict in our lifetime, we often look for ways to avoid conflict. So, why do we run away from dealing with our conflict? It is often because many of us fear the conflict will escalate into a situation we will not be able to sustain. “As conflicts escalate, they go through certain incremental transformations. Although these transformations occur separately on each side, they affect the conflict as a whole because they are usually mirrored by the other side. As a result of these transformations, the conflict is intensified in ways that are sometimes exceedingly difficult to undo” (Pruitt, and Kim 89). We

“The war on drugs, the war on cancer, the battle of the sexes, politicians’ turf battles- in the argument culture war metaphors pervade our talk and shape our thinking,” affirms Tannen. We approach the world in an argumentative frame of mind.”

Overall, the essay seemed to lack flow as a result of a noticeable absence of transition words. The essay had bad syntax. Each paragraph seemed to be scenario after scenario and each sentence seemed to be idea after idea. For example, in the first paragraph, the list consisted of multiple sentences, instead of just one sentence with commas. “But they are few: Being mistaken for a wheat field by a cloud of locusts. Being buried alive”...“Interviews from film festivals.”, this seemed like an awful way to list ideas. In addition, the fourth paragraph of the essay was made up of only 2 sentences, one

Deborah Tannen's book, The Argument Culture, is a compelling piece that looks at the perceived "argument culture" that is permeating the United States and the West in general. I do agree with what Ms. Tannen is saying, that there is a form of argument culture, but I think it could be argued that there is a contrasting part of American society called a "nice culture" as well. On the one hand, you have people who will argue about topics whenever the opportunity arises, but on the other hand you have people who will avoid confrontation at all costs. Ms. Tannen somewhat acknowledges other ethnic cultures in the United States that tend to argue in different ways, "You do not have to go to a foreign country to experience these cultural differences [of how people argue in different cultures.] Americans of different ethnic backgrounds can experience them just by making friends." (Tannen, 211)Acknowledging ethnic culture differences is important but to homogenize it into just an argument culture is wrong.It could still be argued that there is a converse culture in the United States that is based around niceness and civility. You can see it in the world around you where you are taught to use your manners as much as possible or in fast food jobs where workers are supposed to be as "nice" as possible and if anybody makes a mistake they are supposed to apologize as sincerely as possible. Another example of this nice culture is contrast to the argument culture is when adults are arguing

How can people best respond to conflicts is a question commonly asked by people going through a difficult situation without any knowledge of how to respond properly to a certain conflict. The reality is: there is no solid answer to this question. It all depends on what your conflict is, and of course in what position you are. According to the Cambridge Dictionary, a conflict is an active disagreement, as between opposing opinions or needs[1], and according to the Merriam Webster Dictionary the definition of conflict is: a struggle for power[2] , so without a doubt, what people want as a result in a conflict is to have power over the problem, to have control.

In the article, "For Argument’s Sake: Why Do We Feel Compelled to Fight About Everything? Witten by Deborah Tannen. She express that we live in an argumentative culture, where everyone is entitled to their own freedom of speech and rights. Tannen shows that arguments rarely lead to an understanding, but rather that an argument becomes less about the topic at hand and more about proving the opposing side wrong ( Tannen, Deborah(,2008). She tells her stories in many different form to gather the audience’s attention. She then starts to use big words and different logics to appeal to a more intellectual audience. She then starts her stories by manipulating and persuading the unintelligent audience to pull them in so they would know that she is insulting them by using the bigger words, making them feel intimidated.

Stephanie Ericsson categorizes the many ways people lie on a daily basis. She uses a mixture of facts, quotes and opinions to capture the severity of telling a lie. Her article has enabled me to understand the thought process that goes behind telling a lie. She justifies minor lies by using ethos and stating that minor lies prevents hurt feelings and that it is normal to lie. Stephanie frequently asks rhetorical questions to make readers think of the matter at hand. She also uses anaphora to seem more relatable and understanding to her readers. I tell minor lies on a daily basis but I did not realize that there is so many different types of lies. i and many other people often rationalize with ourselves to make our lies seem less harmful when

One approach to respond to conflict is shown in the thoughts and actions of Anne Frank. In the story, Anne Frank: The Diary of a Young Girl, Anne’s solution to make the better of her situation was demonstrated. For instance, her diary entry, dated Saturday, July 11, 1942, describing her living space at the Secret Annex, noticed, “Up to now our bedroom, with its blank walls, was very bare [...] I was able to plaster the wall with pictures. It looks much more cheerful” (Frank 19). This represents a particular action in which Anne made to

The art of quoting and summarizing an argument is one of the main skills to acquire when it comes to writing a successful piece of work. In the book, They Say I Say the art of inserting quotations is mentioned to be one of the highest mistakes made by writers. Many insert a quote that has no frame of introduction or background information which is considered a “hit and run quote.” Readers need to be able to comprehend not only the writings, but the background information and quotes from another author writing in order to have the whole work cohesive. Dire necessity for the writer is to go back to the initial text and truly understand the background from which they are quoting to make sure their audience understands the quote and why

Conflict need not be catastrophic or personal conflicts are simply part of being human. Deal with issues as they arise, avoiding conflict makes situations worse. Time does not resolve matters instead it decreases the chance of a positive outcome. Attempt to understand the other person's point of view because dismissing the other's views, assigning blame, and exclusive focus on your own perspective are all counterproductive. Do not judge emotions, no one's feelings are more or less “right” than the other. Emotions reflect a valid perspective of an individual even if you don't understand it; acknowledge the other person's reaction as important. Focus on the behavior, situation or problem area without attacking the person involved. Do not assume your values or beliefs are “right”, they reflect a view of the world from your unique perspective. Respecting another's viewpoint as equally valuable opens an opportunity for learning and growth (Lifetips moving up in life, 2000).

In the excerpt by Deborah Tannen entitled, The Argument Culture: Moving from Debate to Dialogue Tannen speaks about the oppositional nature of public discourse. She expressed her thoughts on how we are determined to seek certainty by using arguments from two different standpoints, as if there are no additional angles that can be examined. Oftentimes, there are more than two sides of an issue, but due to the way society has taught us, we only look at issues from two extreme perspectives. I find Dr. Tannen to be extremely intelligent in her observations of how people communicate using debates and opposition as a means to express what we believe to be true. Although Americans habitually view issues from only two extreme points of view, dialogue solves more problems than debates because it does not cause division among people as frequently as debates does.

Your writing showcases a good balance between simple and complex sentences, although the effective use of sentence length cannot be easily measured.

For me, I found the essay to be short. I wish that the student would write a lot more and be more

Secondly, Tannen attempts to refute the misconception, held in the “culture of critique”, that “when both sides argue, the truth will emerge” by stating that the “truth is more likely to be found in the complex middle.” However, though this argument does not stand on its own, as it is intended, her subsequent explanation does give the refutation credibility. She reasons that the culture of critique leads reasonable people to waste effort defending themselves from misrepresentation by unreasonable opponents, instead of being constructive; champions of unsubstantiated positions are knowingly given credibility by the media, just so that there can be opposition.