The Last Model Of Argue By Daniel H. Cohen

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.

Arguments are apart of everyday life. We encounter them every day: at home, at work, while watching tv, driving, even listening to the radio. I am not saying we regularly encounter shouting matches, in fact arguing is a communication tool many of us use every day to problem solve. The true nature of arguments is described best by Ramage et al “…argument does not imply anger. In fact, arguing is often pleasurable. It is a creative and productive activity that engages us at high levels of inquiry and critical thinking…” (2). Arguments, at their core, are much more than our initial assumption. An argument can be described as anything that attempts to solve a conflict, that involves at least two conflicting assertions, by appealing to reason. These

In the article For Argument’s Sake; Why Do We Feel Compelled to Fight About Everything? The author brings to light an important understanding of why we as a society argue about everything and why it is necessary in the persuasion process. The most effective way to get a problem solved is to create an argument debate. (Tannen, Deborah) It is often a natural reaction to become defensive when another person threatens our belief system, Tannen refers to this process as the “knee-jerk nature”. When a person finds their standing being opposed, one will fight back with debate therefore causing and extreme case of representing each side. (Tannen, Deborah)

In Chapter 2 of Thank You for Arguing by Jay Heinrichs, he discuses how to distinguish the difference between an argument and a fight, and to decide what you want out of an argument. The key point of an argument is to win over the audience to your point of view. In order to win an argument, you need to persuade them. You want your opponent to be persuaded using subtle logical tactics not power and intimidation. Using power and intimidation is the characteristics of a fight. This is when one person takes out his aggression on another, which does not persuade them but initiate’s revenge or rejection. During a fight, the key objective is to win by attacking and belittling your opponent, paying no attention to getting them to change their mind.

In Deborah Tannen’s book, “The Argument Culture,” she states our society has become an argument culture, where “a culture of critique” can oversimplify, distort or filler out important aspects of a debate. In an online thread posted on “The Blaze” website page under an article that reads, “Teacher: Deport illegal immigrants so schools can ‘better serve American citizen students,” there have been numerous comments posted by online users representing the argument culture, which Tannen emphasizes we are living in. user “Info10” stated, “Rayne Weankee, a former AHS student, told the station he’s “disappointed because I always felt the school should be held to a higher standard, and this isn’t helping their image.” It just moved to a higher

The civil war did reduce sectional antagonist a huge amount but it also made the United states One Nation. The war was a test for the nation or in this case ANY nation for those dedicated to see if they could endure and a final resting place for those who died and for the nation to live. There was division between the north and the south which eventually brought upon the Brutal Civil War. In president Andrew John’s Amnesty proclamation, the Union forgave the confederate and made them swear on an oath to faithfully support, protect, and defend the constitution of the United States. “The union eventually showed that they had no “antagonist” against the south which made the United States One nation once again. The soldiers that risked their lives

“It was the best of times. It was the worst of times.” Not really, but times were getting tough. The year is 1858, and sectionalism is on the rise. States trying to determine what they can do and what the Federal government can't do is causing a small amount of friction. Alright, a lot of friction. States rights was a huge issue, causing disagreements in areas such as slavery, tariffs, nullification, even things as seemingly small as road maintenance. It seemed everything was falling apart.

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 in the way of reaching a possible resolution…” (17). Disputing

Two Latinas and a baby were stopped by security while grocery shopping, because another shopper accused the dark-skinned women of kidnapping the fair-skinned, blue-eyed, blonde baby accompanying them. It was not until the fair-skinned, blue-eyed, blonde father of the baby refuted the accusation, that the women were released. My mother (who is from El Salvador) and my nanny (who is from Belize) were the two women and I was the baby. My mom and nanny would not have been publicly incriminated and shamed, were they fair-skinned. McIntosh’s article substantiates the ubiquity of white privilege. White people do not have to worry about being monitored while running errands or being pulled over because of their skin color. I agree with McIntosh’s point

In 2011, Jennifer Connell was attending her nephew, Sean, 8th birthday party, Connell walks into the backyard and upon seeing his aunt, Sean runs and jumps to hug her. Causing Connell to fall backwards landing on the ground and breaking her wrist in the process. Instead of doing something rash, like, accepting he is eight and it was an accident since the laws of physics are not clear to him yet, she did the rational thing. She filed a lawsuit - against the nephew. She claimed that the nephew had been "careless" and wanted $127,000 for emotional suffering and medical bills. In her claim she stated that she had recently attended a party and her inability to hold her "hors d'oeuvres plate was distressing and embarrassing. Deliberation lasted a mere twenty minutes. The jury awarded Jennifer Connell nothing.

Ever since the beginning, slavery has always been a growing conflict in the United States. However in the 1800s, it became such a problem that it nearly separated the whole country. Those that lived in southern states believed that they had the rights to own slaves. They argued that the slavery made up a fairly large part of their economy because slaves labor was cheap. This is why many of the big time planters were rich. Also, they felt African Americans were unfit to survive on their own. Northern citizens felt that there was no need for slavery and that it was wrong. But who is right regarding this situation. It all depends on the individual. The back and forth arguing between the north and south was intense, neither backing down from the

On April 20, 2017, the undersigned detective responded to the complainant’s residence, located at 5036 Astor Place, SE #301. The complainant and his 13 year old brother Antwan Freeman opened the door and that their mother’s at work. Antwan stated that their 14 year old brother Fashad Freeman is at home but sleeping in his room.

There had always been differences between the northern states and southern states before nullification and secession. This came down to differences in the core drivers of their economies. The south was more oriented towards Agriculture while the north was driven by industrialization. What this meant was that the south was more reserved on the consistent calls by abolitionists in the north. Abolition of slave trade would mean an almost complete collapse of the economy in the South.

You are correct in stating that this was a very sad yet true account for many slave women during this time period. Daniel, let’s not forget about the millions other accounts which haven’t been written down or that we will never hear. I agree about the sick men as well; the world was a tough place and men during this time period saw themselves as rulers of the world and over everything in sight. You are also correct with the statement about the wife’s and that they would rather place blame then to face insult, leave which was almost impossible or confront their husbands. I know that these were during a different time and thing but because no stood up they did become the norm.

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.