The Argument Culture: Rhetorical Analysis
An old adage says, “In quarreling, the truth is always lost,” (Bolander, 1987). The truth is often considered subjective; it depends on circumstances, time, and many other variables. We understand that what is truth to one may not be truth to another, and after reading Dr. Tannen’s work, I realized that she has done exactly what she said exacerbates the argumentative culture we live in today. She has looked at only two sides. Due to this, I would call into question Dr. Tannen’s truthfulness in her book The Argument Culture. Tannen has successfully shown this attitude in our culture but her arguments and writing style force one to conclude that there is a lack personal credibility.
Dr. Deborah Tannen’s thesis, “we have plunged headfirst into what I call the ‘argument culture,” (Tannen, 1998) in her book The Argument Culture, is intended to pique one’s curiosity. Upon reading Dr. Tannen’s work I soon found myself nodding my head in agreement. How can one not agree that our society is not the pillar of chivalry it once was? After fulfilling the requirements for our last session, I find myself questioning Dr. Tannen’s work a little more. I agree that our society has been inundated with a lack of courtesy from all areas. However, I doubt that this is a new condition. Ms. Tannen has brought to the forefront of our minds the condition that our society is in, and is challenging us to change.
Dr. Tannen initially appears to do an excellent job of establishing her credibility through stories. She used examples from public arenas, such as the Holocaust debaters she refers to in The Argument Culture (Tannen, 1998), as well as her interview with National Public Radio (NPR, 1998). ...
... middle of paper ...
...tems from. Author Erastus Wiman once said, “Nothing is ever lost by courtesy. It is the cheapest of the pleasures; costs nothing and conveys much. It pleases him who gives and him who receives and thus, like mercy, it is twice blessed” (Bolander, 1987).
References
Bolander, d. o. (1987). courtesy. In The new webster quotation dictionary (2nd ed., pp. 59-60). , MA: career publishing, inc.
National public radio. (1998, April 25). Npr weekly edition. In http://www.lexisnexis.com.indianapolis.libproxy.ivytech.edu.allstate.libproxy.ivytech.edu/hottopics/lnacademic/. Retrieved March 23, 2011, from Lexisnexis (Transcript # 98042502-213).
Tannen, D. (1998, March 15). For argument's sake; why do we feel compelled to fight about everything. The Washington post. Retrieved March 15, 2011, from
http://www9.georgetown.edu/faculty/tannend/argsake.htm
For some, an argument may be a discussion that leads people to become mad and feel hate towards someone. This also might bring tension, between friends and family, but there’re times when people just want to discuss a topic that they feel would make the conflict better or resolved. When an argument happens, it’s recommended to use Aristotle’s Rhetorical Triangle. It is here that Aristotle set’s up three ways to appeal to the audience, which are ethos, pathos, and logos. These three appeals help the writer to persuade, inform, or convince the audience that what he/she is doing the right thing. Without Aristotle’s Rhetorical Triangle and Aims of Arguments, the writer would unsuccessfully perform an argument correctly. If creditability of the
When I first encountered the word argument in this chapter I thought that I would be informed on what an argument is and how to construct an argument in an essay. After reading the chapter I think arguments much more than creating diversity over a topic. Also, it is much more than making a claim. There are many different styles and ways to present an argument.
Firstly , Tannen introduces the term “culture of critique” by beginning three successive paragraphs with the term so that the reader will not forget it. Tannen then identifies the problem presented by the “culture of critique”, that is, a tendency to attack the person making an argument, or misrepresenting the issue, rather than arguing against their position itself. She points out that instead of listening to reason, people who are caught up in the culture of critique debate as i...
Ramage, John D., John C. Bean, and June Johnson. Writing Arguments: A Rhetoric with Readings. 9th ed. Boston: Pearson Education, 2012. Print.
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.
Rottenberg, Annette T., and Donna Haisty. Winchell. The Structure of Argument. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin's, 2009. Print.
"Fighting for Our Lives" offers great insight into the current state of public dialogue. Deborah Tannen describes how our public interactions have increasingly become "warlike", in the way we discuss ideas, the way we cover the news, and the way we settle disputes. She observes that an adversarial approach has become the standard as much in public dialogue as it has in "just about anything we need to accomplish". Although she concedes that "conflict and opposition are as necessary as cooperation and agreement", she believes that the balance has been tipped in recent years. An "argument culture" has pervaded American culture, and the consequences are real.
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.
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...
According to Tannen, she refers to the hostility within communication as “The Argument Culture.” It has become a war on words that continues to thrive off of conflict, animosity and tension. Tannen addresses the idea of debate, disputes, attack and criticism as a comprehensive list of words to describe her thesis. Tannen uses rhetorical devices by formulating the main points of her argument. She did this by convincing her readers and incorporating facts and reasons. Tannen states, “In close relationships is it possible to find ways of arguing that result in better understanding and solving problems. But with most
* The Aims of Argument. 4th ed Ed.Timothy W. Crusius and Carolyn E. Channell. New York:McGraw Hill,2003, 352-355.
In the article “The Argument Culture Moving from Debate to Dialogue,” by Deborah Tannen, she claims that there are only two sides to every situation. I agree with Tannen when she says that there are only two sides to any situations. I agree with her statement because debate topics only have two sides. Not only debate topics, but I grow up always hearing there is two sides to every story. For example, the debate topics on same-sex marriage and the death penalty, only have two sides you are either for it or against it. One of the examples that I mentioned was same-sex marriage, this is a situation that because there is only two sides a lot of people can get hurt if they are involved. For example, people that are for same-sex marriage believe
In this chapter, Heinrichs argues that people have an issue with differentiating between arguments and fights. He cites ancient philosophers and studies about marriages to support his argument that when people resort to fighting rather than arguing to resolve issues, their outcome is inevitably doomed. They fight to win and overpower the opponent, whereas they argue to win over the audience, and the latter provides them with an outcome in which both parties are appeased. Heinrichs further argues this idea by pointing out the benefits that come from persuading one’s opponent through an argument, namely, that no vengeful reactions are incited and the opponent leaves the argument agreeing with the other person, not angry at them. He supports
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
i Fitzhenry, R. I. (ed.). Barnes & Noble Book of Quotations, New York, Barnes & Noble Books, 1986, 197.