Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Polarization in US politics
Summary of Argument Culture by Deborah Tannen
National anthem protest essay
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Polarization in US politics
According to Tannen (1998), the argument culture pretty much urges us to discuss our different ideads in debeate form. We use our topics and live our lives by pretty much having a winner and a loser for everything that we do. One current issues that is shown today is different athles protesting the nathinal anthem for support of black lives matter. People are either saying that it is right for them to express there first admendement rught of freedom of speech while oher people are stating that it is wrong because it is disrespectful to the history of the nation. Another current issues that people have to choose between is Trump Vs Clinton during this political time. You have to either agree with one or the other with no midddle ground. If your
a Clinton suppoerter you are a femisnist, if you are a Trump supporter you are a racist, so their is no common ground bewteen them. Marjuianna use, should it be used as a recerational use or should it be banned for use? Propostion 64 with a passing vote will pass marjuiana useage for everyeone over the age of 21 to use whenever they want to. This is important because the drug that is most common in California will be used as a bennifeit for money for our state as well as help cops go after more serious criminals.Fourth, social media which has taken over the insturdy of news outles , is it more of relaiable source of news amd information then the media as we knew it. Most people today are using the means of sites like Facebook and Twitter to get the information about the world today. So if this is happeneig should their be training and semanaors for people to learn about how to tell the difference between ads and actual news stories? Lastly , California being the first state to raise the legal smoking age of tabocco from 18 to 21, will the rest of the states follow? California is a tester state where the governemtn is trying to see if raising the age will help benifiet the state of california as well as its people. Just like Tannen (1998) state’s , people have to choose two sides no matter what because it is embeded in our DNA. All these topics there is a right and a wrong answer but not an middle ground where there should be one.
Despite finding Harley’s article easier to absorb, I will be providing insight and knowledge of Scannell’s article “Dailiness” as I drew interest into his concepts and ideas behind the notion of temporality of everyday life. After Scannell’s reading, I could see myself reflecting different notions of time and ‘media time’, through his concepts of routinisation and the ‘care structures’ of dailiness I became exposed to the recurring cycle we live in.
Summary – In an argument you are attempting in persuasion to change the audience’s mood, mind or their willingness to act. In a fight you are focused on beating your opponent rather than winning over the audience. It is important when in the midst of an argument you know exactly what you want by the end of it.
Society is built on the fact that everyone is different: different gender, different hair color, different body types, and, most importantly, different opinions. Although conflict stems from different opinions, humans can not help but have their own thoughts and feelings about every situation. Different opinions, such as democrats vs. republicans or pro-life vs. pro-birth, are just a few examples, on the neverending list, of society spitting their views on a topic. Despite the fact that everyone is so different, people can learn from each other and grow their opinions after hearing the other “side of the story”. We may not always agree with each other, but we should just listen, understand, and respect the fact that everyone has different opinions.
Historians can either disagree or agree into a situation to find the meaning of outcomes. Certainly the past had happened the way it is therefore history is always explained from other people’s perspective. The perspective of historians such as Bernard Baiylin or Gary Nash can relate to the American Revolution, however Baiyln has a stronger argument because he expands the topic, gives great information that readers can pick up right away, and has reliable sources while Nash’s argument is weak because of difficult wording, relies on common data, and lacks of direct facts that relate to his topic.
Brooks brings in the evidence in the beginning of the article. His evidence is more like a scenario.
There are many examples of strong argumentative writing in the second half of the book Everyday Arguments. Topics of writing examples include today’s college student, the internet, sports, earning your living, diet, and reading popular culture. Of the writings, two stood out as notable works to be critiqued; Who is a Teacher, and Thoughts on Facebook.
Tannen states, “In the argument culture, criticism, attack, or opposition are the predominant if not the only ways of responding to people or ideas. I use the phrase “culture of critique,” to capture this aspect. “Critique in the sense is not a general term for analysis or interpretation but rather a synonym for criticism.” Tannen states that she is calling attention to and calling into question the inherent dangers of the argument culture, however her article does not discuss an approachable strategy that would solve this social
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, titled “The Triumph of the Yell”, Tannen claims that journalists, politicians and academics treat public discourse as an argument. Furthermore, she attempts to persuade her readers that this posturing of argument as a conflict leads to a battle, not a debate, and that we would be able to communicate the truth if this culture were not interfering. This paper will discuss the rhetorical strategies that Tannen utilizes, outline the support given in her editorial, and why her argument is less convincing than it should be.
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 deal with the past, deliberative talks about the future, and ceremonial is all about the present. I have identified each of these arguments in the form of newspaper articles.
The progression of US society has become increasingly more individualistic every generation. Twenge’s analysis of Generation Me accurately depicts the way people today are more irritable and inclined to argue when their points are challenged. Similarly, the argument culture discussed by Tannen has taken over the American education system in part due to this rise in narcissism. Overall it is clear while one was not meant to lead to another, the argument culture and narcissism are not only related, but they unintentionally grow off of one another.
Are there more than two sides to an argument? The Argument Culture was written by Deborah Tannen (Tannen, 1998). She would have us believing that there are more sides to an argument than just two. Professor Deborah Tannen is a best-selling author. She is a professor of linguistics at Georgetown University. She has written many books, articles, and educational essays. She would say that high-tech communication pulls us apart. She also states that argument culture shapes who we are. Tannen also believes that we can end the argument culture by looking at all sides of the story or situation. She seems to be very knowledgeable on the subject.
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 her article “The Argument Culture,” professor of linguistics and author Deborah Tannen believes that we have collapsed into a society where arguing, criticizing, and debating is the solution to every problem. Tannen introduces this idea of society as the “argument culture”. The argument culture is a way of life that settles on the belief that the best way to get things done is to oppose everything. The way we freely and blatantly express problems is one of our society’s greatest strengths. People tend to express their beliefs and automatically expect someone to reply with their own view, therefore turning into an argument as to why each side is right and the other is wrong. We tend to look at both sides of an argument to side with the one
Deborah Tannen, the author of “The Argument Culture”, is good at persuading persons. She persuades readers, pointing problems of tradition debate that most people following without thinki...
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.