Arguements

Out of the two articles I have to say that Tannen wrote the best piece. I full-heartedly agree that people sometimes get so caught up in wanting to be right at the time that they just argue for the sake of arguing, and more often than not their argument ends up being more detrimental to their overall cause. In more extreme cause, mainly concerning politics, to often do opposing political sides refuse to compromise or consider the opposing sides proposal that all that happens is both sides argue, nothing happens and only time was wasted. Arguing generally leaves for a hostile environment and this makes it difficult to form a conclusion/or end to the point of the argument in the first place.

I will also say that even though in many cases arguing is unnecessary at best, I believe that Graff had a point in saying people should be educated on how to argue. This could essentially solve the idea behind the pointless argument and really clean up the thoughtless and occasionally pointless ideas thrown around in an argument. Teach people how to make their points and back it up, as well as how to respect and listen to the opposing proposition. The only way to really make use of an argument is for it to be used to get whatever conflict solved, and that involves listening/compromising.

I think I would have respected Graff’s opposing article if his article didn’t sound like it was mostly geared towards his annoyance with Tannen’s article. Many of his disagreements were simply that he barely backed up most of his opinions and comments against Tannen’s article. I thought it was interesting that Graff was pro-argue and his entire paper was a giant argument, or at least that’s what it came off as to me as a reader.

Bother articles made great points on whether or not arguing is worth learning about, I really think it would be funny to get these two authors together and see what they came up with. Graff should have spent more time backing up his point instead of taking a completely negative stance against Tannen. I bet Tanned would argue it as being a sexist view on her “female” status against the overuse of argument.

These articles really made me look at the idea behind the argument a little differently; I never considered the idea behind the “argument” with so much depth.