Understanding the Argument Culture: Solutions in Cooperative Argumentation It can be said that argument has become deeply inbred in the human experience. In our first day of class in Cooperative Argumentation, our professor gave us two definitions of the word argument from Google. The first definition described argument as a heated or angry discussion of opposite views. This definition leads individuals to use non-factual information to win an argument. The second definition is a reason/set of reasons given with the intent of persuading others that an action or idea is right or wrong. This leads individuals to use more factual methods to ensure they have a sound argument. In The Argument Culture: Moving from Debate to Dialogue, Tannen …show more content…
Tannen uses examples of news media discussions on a topic; the news media will bring in two people to discuss the issue and let them fight to the death. For example, say the topic is low efforts to fighting global warming. We might have a scientist, and a politician to discuss the issue. They both might start pointing the finger at each other. The scientist may say that the government is not providing enough funds for research, while the politician may say that the scientist is not doing enough with the current funds. You may see how this may turn into a heated argument. Tannen suggest that we should consider having a third party commentate, but it needs to be someone that is not committed to one side. This suggestion will help to have an argument that moves away from comparing both sides against each other, so we may look at both sides individually. However, just having a third party will not help to move away from the first definition of an argument. For us to ensure that this solution will be successful, we must first turn to Cooperative Argumentation as Tannen has not considered groupthink becoming a potential problem in this situation. In groupthink, people will begin to forget about their own beliefs and go with what the group is discussing to avoid conflict. How do we know that the third party will not create a groupthink environment? Tannen suggest “(…) we not give up conflict
Click here to unlock this and over one million essaysGet Access
What is groupthink? There is a simple definition for it, but is it truly that simple? The term groupthink refers to the inclination of group members to have the same opinions and beliefs; it frequently leads to mistakes. It often occurs without an individual being aware of it. Conflict is considered to be a harmful element when related to groups, but conflict is good when considering groupthink because it helps to eliminate the existence of a groupthink. The explanation sounds simple enough, but it is more complex than the description given.
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
Arguments can be made out of just about anything. An argument has two sides, and conveying an opinion is one of those two sides. Arguments sort out the views of others and the support of those arguments represented by those people from past events. These events let others show their argument about what will happen in the future, and of how the future carries on today. Newspaper articles can be arguments, and laws being passed in Congress have a form of argument associated with them. There are many types of arguments that are presented in many ways. In Everything’s an Argument by Andrea A. Lunsford and John J. Ruszkiewicz, information is given about three specific types of argument: forensic, deliberative, and ceremonial. Forensic arguments
Have we become a world that has forgotten how to listen and debate? Why are people so quick to argue? Everyone wants to prove their point these days. In “The Argument Culture,” Deborah Tannen discusses how today’s society no longer honors the noble American tradition of debate. She explains how we no longer want to take the time to listen to both sides and definitely not all sides of an issue. We have become a society that would rather fight and argue, often to the point of violence.
An argument is a claim supported by reasons and pieces of evidence. Arguments have five primary attributes. Firstly, argumentation is a social process which involves two or more parties responding to one another’s proposal or claim. For the case of a written argument, the writer responds to the content of the essay through a critique process. The responses should not only involve restating the same claims and reasons but rather providing supportive pieces of evidence to the positions taken accordingly. Secondly, the aim of an argument is to make the audience adhere to the written critique. The objective is to influence the audience with the aim of gaining support to
Argumentation is a significant element, and people tend to use it every day. By using the word “argumentation” I do not mean to go against someone’s opinion and arguing with them, but what I mean is making others have faith or some sort of belief on the person who is arguing. However, these arguments can occur in two ways such as direct argument and indirect argument. Furthermore, these arguments work with elements and there are three types of elements ethos, pathos, and logos. These elements are engaged with practical reasoning which are divided into three parts datum, warrant, and claim. Accordingly, to discuss about the process of the argumentation “Letter from a Birmingham Jail” will be a notable example.
In their essays, both authors Sidney Callahan and Deborah Tannen discuss strategies for a possible improvement in society’s ways of arguing. In “Fight Fierce but Fair: Practice at Home,” (1994), Callahan claims “if you learn to fight well and fairly at home, you can contribute to the civic struggle necessary to keep a pluralistic society moving.” With a set of guidelines and rules composed through personal experience, Callahan successfully uses this technique to give readers an immediate call to action and a solid, convincing essay. In “The Triumph of the Yell,” (1994), Tannen claims that “more and more these days, journalists, politicians, and academics treat public discourse as an argument – not in the sense of
Different people have different types of arguments, depending on the situation, which may be good or not good. An argument can be defined as many things. According to Mike, who I interviewed, he interprets an argument as something being determined or evaluated that is true or false with the presence of credible research or evidence. The definition of an argument according to me, is defined as the exchange of ideas to another person that may be true, false, negative, or
The article by The Writing Center at UNC-Chapel Hill on the topic “Argument” is communicating a point of view; an idea you strongly feel about something or call to action on any subject that is true, real or right. An argument includes interpretation of the purpose, making a claim, premise, providing evidence for the case that is a compelling, examples, and evoking change from the audience to believe in something.
Feldman begins the introduction of his inquiry by identifying the importance of argumentation in critical thinking and epistemology. He states, “Epistemology is the abstract study of knowledge and rationality. Critical thinking, as I understand it, is a kind of applied epistemology, the underlying idea being that thinking clearly and carefully about any issue requires understanding and applying some fundamental epistemological concepts” (Feldman 1). He goes further to describe arguments as “tools for helping us figure out what it is most reasonable to believe” (Feldman 2). A good argument is an earnest exchange between different parties that are trying to establish an agreeable conclusion. It is for this reason that agreeing to disagree is fallacious. In a debate, the sole purpose is to challenge ideas and claims in order to come to the paramount and most logical conclusion. The function of deliberation is
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.
The term groupthink in this report is defined as, the social psychological phenomenon that results in groups during pressure situations. This social psychology theory is broken down into eight signs. Illusion of invulnerability, Collective rationalization, Belief in inherent morality, Stereotyped views of out-groups, Direct pressure on dissenters, Self-censorship, Illusion of unanimity, Self-appointed “mindguards”. According to research conducted by Irving Janis, there are three conditions to groupthink. The first, "high group cohesiveness" which is the direction for a group to be in unity while working towards a goal, or to satisfy the emotional needs of its members. Secondly, the structural faults such as insulation of the group, lack
With the potential of having many opinions within the group, it can be difficult and time costly to ultimately reach a consensus. As individuals, we are all rhetoricians and have different methods of communication. When it comes to discussing our opinions and persuading group members of our ideas, arguments are sometimes created because of the diversity within the group. What matters is whether the argument is productive or not. “While there are many unproductive arguments, others generate some of the most creative joint thinking we ever achieve together” (Mercer, 74). Unfortunately, in the case of groupthink, arguments tend to be avoided at all costs.
Dr. Allison Brennan touched on various topics about dynamics of social interaction during the process of cognitive collaboration. The main focus was towards social interaction between people rather than focusing on what factors influence social development in an individual. Her research on cognitive collaboration was conducted with the same experimental task called, Enumeration Visual. This is where participants collaborate with a friend and sometimes a non friend to answer given questions.
The expression argument has two meanings in scholarly writing. First, it means a composition that takes a position on one side of a divisive issue. You might write an argument against the death penalty, or for or against censorship of pornography. But argument has another meaning, too. It means an essay that, simply, argues a point. You might assemble an argument about the significance of ancestor myths in a certain aborigine culture, or you might write an argument defending your understanding of any poem or essay that is read in your philosophy class. (Winthrop University) You are not necessarily taking one side of a divisive issue, but you are required to defend your points with credible evidence. You are taking a position. In a sense,