You Just Don T Understand Deborah Tannen Analysis

In the society we live today we surround ourselves with positivity and negativity. The stuff that is happening today are they getting better or worse? Based on the article “Taking a ‘War of Words’ Too Literally”, by Deborah Tannen, she defines the new norm of our society “the argument culture”. Tannen discusses her experiences and states that we are more confrontational and less open to others.

The next topic the author offered for an argument is, setting your goals of what you want to gain from your audience. The first and most simple step is to change the audiences mood. If you are able to change their mood, you make them more vulnerable to your argument and more willing to listen to you. The second step winning an argument is, changing the audiences mind and opinion. An example of this from the text is, convincing the light bulb that a replacement is the best way to get some light in the room. You want to promote yourself to them instead of coming off with the impression of a rival. The last and most difficult step to winning an argument is, getting to audience to take action. In order to get the audience to do this, you must be on a more emotional and personal level. As quoted from the text, you not only need to use desire to motivate but you need to convince them that taking this action is not a big deal; something they shouldn’t sweat about. Overall, chapter was very descriptive and informing in distinguishing the difference between an argument and a fight, and how to go about winning these

The first chapter introduced the reader to the art of rhetoric. He describes how rhetoric works through real life examples. He demonstrates ways that rhetoric persuades us like, argument from strength, and seduction. He tells the reader that the sole purpose of arguing is to persuade the audience. He showed that the chief purpose of arguing is to also achieve consensus, a shared faith in a choice.

Her idea was that God has made us and he also loves us .The greatness of God cannot be measured. She was mainly involved in the social activities because she thought that this act of kindness made by her might take her near to the God. All her sayings were in one way or another

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.

Knowing that she and her family are able to survive such distressing situations without having to jeopardize their views allows her to have faith in her family's future and gives

speaker, audience. In their writing (chapter 1) argue that everything can be turned into an argument. They support their claim by first telling about Michelle Obama's tweets about her concern of a kidnapping, by terrorist group Boko Haram, of more than 200 Nigerian girls in 2014. Then by explaining how we make arguments. The author’s purpose is to inform readers about make arguments by using ethos, pathos, and logos.

The message between these two different women who came from two different times and seemingly really two different worlds is that they both fight for what they believe in. This is important in life and

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.

In this quote, she realizes her attitude was bad when she was with her family, and since they died she realizes she didn’t stand in good faith.

Postman says that, as a result, "all public understanding of these subjects is shaped by the biases of television" (78) and that in the absence of rational discourse, cultural decay is sure to follow.

That both genders have common ground as people. She goes on to describe how society is becoming more progressive, that whether or not people want to admit it, changes are coming and as time goes on women will be granted more equality. This change was already being seen but just needed further progression.

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.

Americans have embraced debate since before we were a country. The idea that we would provide reasoned support for any position that we took is what made us different from the English king. Our love of debate came from the old country, and embedded itself in our culture as a defining value. Thus, it should not come as a surprise that the affinity for debate is still strong, and finds itself as a regular feature of the mainstream media. However, if Deborah Tannen of the New York Times is correct, our understanding of what it means to argue may be very different from what it once was; a “culture of critique” has developed within our media, and it relies on the exclusive opposition of two conflicting positions (Tannen). In her 1994 editorial,