Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Political party polarization
Summary of Argument Culture by Deborah Tannen
Political party polarization
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Political party polarization
Drifting Poles In her essay “The Argument Culture: Moving from Debate to Dialogue” Deborah Tannen speaks at length about how america and humanity in general have become more ideologically polarized and have drifted further and further away from compromise. This holds true in the modern America we see today. The country is being torn apart by bitter divisiveness and an unwillingness to even consider an inkling of the point of view of the opposition. This bitterness and deep seated resentment has caused rifts in the country which have serious consequences on our daily lives as americans. Our concept of a debate has begun to change, becoming a brawl of words and lies as opposed to a contest of ideas weighed by pros and cons. While real issues …show more content…
This concept however, has become an ideal. Instead of the calm rational discussion that one expects would be stimulating despite being with someone who holds a different view, debates and discourse have become rather different. The idea of a discussion or even a conversation has become blurred with the concept of an argument. We gather or thoughts and ideas like bullets shooting them at the opposition hoping to batter them into submission with the perceived legitimacy of our argument, while simultaneously attempting to delegitimize their own viewpoint. This stems from how we approach those with opposing ideas, as an all or nothing scenario in which one must be infallible and the other, demonic. However this conflict oriented debate draws on only a select few, and can alienate many with informed opinions or enlightened ideas “when debate opposition and fights overwhelmingly predominate, those who enjoy verbal sparring are likely to take part” “and those who cannot comfortably take part in oppositional discourse, or do not wish to, are likely to opt out.” (495). When presented with more limited range of ideas inevitably the more radical ideas tend to rise to the surface. When this scenario is presented over and over again online and in the media it can create a perception that only these limited
The book Culture Wars? The Myth of a Polarized America by Morris P. Fiorina, Samuel J. Abrams, and Jeremy C. Pope is a persuasive text regarding America and its division on political topics.
Increasingly over the past two decades and in part thanks to the publication of James Davison Hunter’s book, Culture Wars: The Struggle to Define America, the idea of a culture war in American politics has been gaining attention. While the tension between conservatives and liberals is palpable, it’s intensity has proven hard to measure. However, it doesn’t seem that many Americans are polarized on the topic of polarization as most would agree that the culture war is real (Fiorina, 2005). This thinking is what prompted Morris Fiorina to write the book Culture War? The Myth of a Polarized America. In it, Fiorina outlines an argument against the idea of a culture war by looking at party affiliation by states, how public opinion on hot button issues changed over time and various explanations for why Americans are so hung up on the topic of polarization. While Fiorina makes a good argument, the evidence supporting the culture war is too powerful to explain away.
The author uses the guest’s comment as a segue into the discussion of his main thesis, that debating in America has become an act of aggression and anger, rather than a civil-argument. Leo discusses how this may have occurred
Americans have become so engrossed with the rhetoric of political parties that many are unable have real discussions about “freedom, fairness, equality, opportunity, security, accountability.” (Lakoff p.177) The election of 1828 gave birth to the “professional politician” it demonstrated how “ambivalence” on issues, how image and the right language or narrative can influence voters. Partisanship did increase competition and empower voters to a greater degree, but it has also divided Americans and obstructed communication. As one historian declared the “old hickory” killed the ideal of nonpartisan leadership. (Parsons p.184) For better or for worse American politics were forever be changed in 1828.
An explanation is a set of statements constructed to describe a set of facts which clarifies the causes, contexts, and consequences of those facts. This description may establish rules or laws, and may clarify the existing ones in relation to any objects, or phenomena examined. The first piece Bush Remarks Roil Debate over Teaching of Evolution written by Elizabeth Bumiller, is an explanation. Bumiller addresses her points using facts rather than opinions, she also says, “Recalling his days as Texas governor, Mr. Bush said in the interview, according to a transcript, “I felt like both sides ought to be properly taught.”(2), this signifies that this is an explanation and not an argument since he sees both sides instead of choosing one. For
Tan includes a direct quote from her mother in paragraph six of the reading, and she does not shorten it for an important reason. Tan decides to keep the entire quote instead of paraphrasing to add an effect that a reader can only understand with the full quote. It shows that even though some people speak the language of English it is hard for others to understand based on the person’s full understanding and comprehension of the language. In Tan’s case she is used to the way her mother speaks and uses the language, but to others it is almost impossible to understand. If it were not for Tan summarizing what the quote meant before putting it in the text, few readers would have understood what the mother was trying to convey with her use of the language. Tan’s strategy in including this direct quotation is to show that language differs from person to person even if they all speak the same language. She is implying that the whole world could speak English; however, it would not be the same type of English because of how everyone learns and how others around
Political Polarization is one of the most widely accepted causes of political gridlock, as the two sides continue to drift further and further apart. But why does the chasm keep growing? A few different theories call out the masses and the elites as being the principal actors in driving polarization. Fiorina says that the masses, or just average people, are not the ones that are polarizing. In fact she thinks that it is the elites who are driving polarization as they attempt to stay as far away
In the United States of America, there are a number of national issues that go unresolved and become more of a major issue subsequently. The lack of resolution in some of our nation’s most critical issues is due to the lack of a common ground between opposing political parties. Issues such as healthcare, climate change, abortion, same-sex marriage, taxes and welfare are reoccurring problems in the United States due to congressional gridlock. The cause of congressional gridlock can be attributed to the difference in liberal and conservative views, which can be further examined through some of the nation’s most prominent reoccurring issues such as immigration and gun control.
In the recent years of the 21st century, the human race has come upon a golden age of communication, where we have seen the rise of the internet’s power to inform and fuel massive movements. While this is true, on the other side of the monitor, Humanity struggles to overcome its base instincts. “The Backfire Effect”, written by David McRaney, is a reflection of people’s current state on their own thoughts in comparison to other opinions. This titular mechanism, as described by the author, negates this ease of access to vital information (possibly an idea or fact contradictory to our own views) due to our mind protecting core beliefs. As we can see, this is stifling to the goal of a world where technology and reason is king, a world we all
middle of paper ... ... The culture war in America is always in view for the population. So much time is focused on the issue at hand instead of the actual progress being made. Moral differences between parties take preference over solving the issue.
The Turn of the Screw by Henry James has been the cause of many debates about whether or not the ghosts are real, or if this is a case of a woman with psychological disturbances causing her to fabricate the ghosts. The story is told in the first person narrative by the governess and is told only through her thoughts and perceptions, which makes it difficult to be certain that anything she says or sees is reliable. It starts out to be a simple ghost story, but as the story unfolds it becomes obvious that the governess has jumps to conclusions and makes wild assumptions without proof and that the supposed ghosts are products of her mental instability which was brought on by her love of her employer
“Where justice is denied, where poverty is enforced, where ignorance prevails, and where any one class is made to feel that society is an organized conspiracy to oppress, rob and degrade them, neither persons nor property will be safe”( Douglass). This famous quote epitomizes the philosophies of Frederick Douglass, in which he wanted everyone to be treated with dignity; if everyone was not treated with equality, no one person or property would be safe harm. His experience as a house slave, field slave and ship builder gave him the knowledge to develop into a persuasive speaker and abolitionist. In his narrative, he makes key arguments to white abolitionist and Christians on why slavery should be abolished. The key arguments that Frederick Douglass tries to vindicate are that slavery denies slaves of their identity, slavery is also detrimental for the slave owner, and slavery is ungodly.
James Wilson’s article, “How Divided are We?”, attempts to convince the reader that there is polarization (a culture war) in the United States. Wilson does not define polarization by partisan disagreements solely, rather as “an intense commitment to a candidate, a culture, or an ideology that sets people in one group definitively apart from people in another, rival group” (Canon 205). This polarization stretches to the extent that one group’s set of beliefs is totally correct and the rival is wholly wrong (Canon 206). Wilson provides three chief factors for the growth of polarization...
A mere question is how Tannen pulls the reader into her article titled “The Argument Culture.” Deborah Tannen uses multiple rhetorical devices such as language, logos, and imagery to explain in depth the “adversarial mindset” plaguing America and shows us her solution in the article “The Argument Culture”. Tannen wanted to inform Americans how argument based we truly are and persuade us to make change. Like I stated earlier Tannen begins this process by placing a question in our minds, “Balance. Debate. Listening to both sides. Who could question these Noble American traditions” (Tannen 403)? Tannen then structures her article to develop understanding of the concept among the uninformed. Ethos, Pathos, and Logos also play a key role in the description of the culture, but Tannen adds in real life examples and imagery to create mental
In brief, I agree that we, as humans, tend to be set in our ways and many of our problems are related to miscommunication, along with the fact that our judgments are biased because of our experiences and education. Even though I believe that it is human nature to lean towards the more interesting argument, I do not agree that all humans follow the individual in command without questioning as well as disagreeing with their views on at least one subject.