Project 1: THE PROPOSAL
I am choosing to argue the
construct that arguing is always negative. We started to discuss this earlier
when we read the article, “Arguing as Conversation”, by Stuart Greene. Since
reading that article I have started to think about this more often, and even
outside of reading. Whether I am in my Anthropology class arguing that Alfred
Wallace originally had the idea for Natural Selection, not Charles Darwin, or
out on the weekend listening to drunkards argue about sports, I am now always
thinking not about who is right or wrong, but about what each person brings to
the table.
It is close-minded individuals who
keep this construct going. People who fail to see that most of the time there
is validity in both sides of an argument. This causes people to write in the
exact same way their sources do, without questioning them, or examining them
for bias. With this construct people don’t write ‘good’ papers, people really
need to create their own argument by reading between the lines and analyzing
specific details about not only the text, but where the text comes from and so
on.
Key Terms:
Argument
Negative
Inquiry
Research
Negative
Inquiry
Research
Contribution
Hey Cy,
ReplyDeleteI think this is a great idea for a topic because there are a lot of different ways we could interpret "negative." For instance, argument is often seen as "warfare" right? And it is described in those terms. Who will "win" the debate? How does one attack their opponent? Etc. These reductive ways of thinking about argument have a real effect in our culture; they discourage actual civil discourse-involved, intellectual discussion between people who have disagreements. In fact, it is discouraged so much that we find outselves in a college class trying to discover what argument really is, and what it could be in a more perfect society. What would happen if people in the public realm actually talked through issues? What if politicians actually debated issues rather than being so focused on "winning"?
I think the stuff that we've read so far (like Greene and Kantz) can help you in thinking about a conception of argument to replace the prevalent construct with. You'll also be able to find other sources through research and by looking at Greene's Works Cited.
But you'll also want some sources to show how prevalent these negative conceptions about argument are in our culture, and the different types of negative conceptions. For this, you'll want to find actual example of public discourse to study. Say a mainstream news program or article, a public debate, etc.
Make sense? I'm excited about this project. Good work.