People will do anything to win an argument. Ripping apart an argument trying to make the other person feel bad will cause tempers to flare. In her article “The Triumph of the Yell” written by Deborah Tannen, she talked about how almost everything is being argued and she is blaming journalists and politicians for feeding the flame of public arguments. In the article, Tannen talked a lot about a “culture of critique”. In classes and in the workforce we are expected to use “critical thinking” on someones paper, but what they really want is for us to take that work and tear it apart. Finding every flaw and exploiting it.
Arguments nowadays are more like fights, we all have fights with family, friends and people we are not acquainted with. These fights include exploiting mistakes the opposition's argument, yelling, and even childish things such as name-calling. In this style of arguing, it is very difficult to get anywhere. Both parties will more than likely shut down and avoid reaching an agreement. Tannen wrote “More and more these days, journalists, politicians, and academics treat public discourse as an argument -- not in the sense of making one, but in the sense of having one, of having a fight.”. She thinks that arguments now are …show more content…
When she met the man she told him, “... I’m going to attack you. But don’t take it personally. That's why they invite me on, so that’s what I’m going to do.”. After this they went on set and the argument started. After Professor Tannen spoke a couple of sentences the man started to react in an angry way. He was making a lot of gestures and started to attack the female gender. The on set audience even started to attack the professor. This just shows that people will react differently during arguments. It is impossible to predict how the opposition will react, so be safe and prepare for the
Arguments nowadays are more like fights, we all have fights with family, friends and people we are not acquainted with. These fights include exploiting mistakes the opposition's argument, yelling, and even childish things such as name-calling. In this style of arguing, it is very difficult to get anywhere. Both parties will more than likely shut down and avoid reaching an agreement. Tannen wrote “More and more these days, journalists, politicians, and academics treat public discourse as an argument -- not in the sense of making one, but in the sense of having one, of having a fight.”. She thinks that arguments now are …show more content…
When she met the man she told him, “... I’m going to attack you. But don’t take it personally. That's why they invite me on, so that’s what I’m going to do.”. After this they went on set and the argument started. After Professor Tannen spoke a couple of sentences the man started to react in an angry way. He was making a lot of gestures and started to attack the female gender. The on set audience even started to attack the professor. This just shows that people will react differently during arguments. It is impossible to predict how the opposition will react, so be safe and prepare for the