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. Firstly , Tannen introduces the term “culture of critique” by beginning three successive paragraphs with the term so that the reader will not forget it.
In this sense, it is moreover a pursuit of proving my impressions and a defence of Searle rather than a neutral comparison. However, on my way through dealing with both authors I realised that I was pushing Searle's position quite far – but still in way he would not disapprove – in order to make it compatible with Menger's account. In this sense, the loss of strength of Searle's account through my reading allows m... ... middle of paper ... .... In: Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 57 (2), 449 – 458. SEARLE, John R. (2005): What is an institution?
Plato's Writings Plato's profound early writing on politics, ethics and education discussed in the Republic are the foundations of today's governments, nations and discourses. At least that is what I am told. Plato's ideology and reasoning are not always the most believable and desirable, it makes me wonder which part of today's government practices must give due to the Republic (to be discovered in Gov 101). While it is easy to be disgusted with Plato's idealism and philosophy, which seems to deter any type of an acceptable nightlife, it does leave the reader with a desire to keep trudging through endless mounds of self-indulged prose to discover Plato's reasoning. One such view, that I've been asked to dissect, is Plato's idea of justice.
What his statements have to do with faith in connection with literature is up to the reader, since in one of his articles he specifically mentions, “literature is not a surrogate for religion” (Brooks 19). He seems to contradict himself on purpose to keep his central thesis hard to reach. In evaluating some of his “faith articles”, the reader can have a critical examination of his critique of his formalist criticism. His first statement is that “Literary criticism is a description and evaluation of its object” (Brooks 19). The literary critic reports on the work that he is criticizing and picks out the meaning that he deems important, which might be different from what the next critic would pick out.
Frankenstein and Structuralism Professor John Lye of Brock University, California describes literary theory as: "a collection of related theoretical concepts and practices which are marked by a number of premises, although not all of the theoretical approaches share or agree on all of them." The first segment of this essay aims to define the main views of structuralism, one of these theoretical approaches. Structuralism, in particular the work of Ferdinand de Saussure, created controversy as it directly challenged some of the values of the everyday reader in the way it attempts to disregard the actual content of writings, and instead concentrates on form and diagrammatics. As the name suggests structuralism is concerned with the interrelationships between structures and the general laws by which they work. In his essay dated 1968, Roland Barthes sought to convince the individual reader that the author is obsolete; writers only have the capacity to draw upon existing themes (or structures) and reassemble them in a different order.
In this literature, Socrates and Euthyphro debate the ... ... middle of paper ... ...rinciples of law that were founded outside of his or her own opinion. They are not the source of what is just or unjust, but rather they merely apply the rules already established from years of social progression and political influence. Thus, when Divine Command theorists argue that they have successfully conquered the Euthyphro Argument, they must be reminded that the opposite is true, and the age-old dilemma has actually reduced their deities to magistrates of morality. Works Cited Craig, W. L. (2010). On Guard: Defending Your Faith with Reason and Precision.
Lynne V. Cheney, author of the essay, “PC: Alive and Entrenched” states that “composition courses have become particularly susceptible to ideological teaching,” (The Presence of Others, A. Lunsford and J. Ruszkeiwicz, p. 114). In Cheney’s essay, she discuss es a statement from Maxine Hairston, former chair of the Conference on College Composition and Communication. The statements show how Hairston believes that “the new model for freshman writing programs as on ‘that puts dogma before diversity, politics ... ... middle of paper ... ..., and is probably always difficult, but not more so than overcoming another teacher’s poor instruction.” (p. 130) This statement draws the two together and I cannot think of a better relationship between the student a nd teacher. I would like to sum this all up with a conclusion from Zawodniak, (p. 131)... “Students and teachers have to get personal: students have to get into the personal to write about it, and teachers have to talk about the personal to help us talk about it. Teacher and student must work and continue conversations together...”.
Christian Bay attempts to clarify the scientific based research going on in his field by comin... ... middle of paper ... ...te their interests.” Both of these definitions are more closely related to Bay’s definition of “pseudopolitics” than his definition of politics. Through the analysis of these three definitions it can be determined that Christian Bay’s definition of politics is not very useful and creates a false divide between what is and is not political behaviour. Works Cited Bay, Christian. “Politics and Pseudopolitics: A Critical Evaluation of Some Behavioural Literature.” The American Political Science Review 59, no. 1 (1965): 39-40, http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/1976119 Brodie, Janine., S. Rein, M. Smith, eds.
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?