What I found suprising in chapter one was how it reshaped my view on arguments. Before I thought that an argument was a disagreement that always ended in some sort of fight. Well that is clearly not the case. Like the example of an agrument to inform. Who knew a street sign could be considered an argument? In fact an agrument is just simply discovering a truth, and a street sign definitly helps someone discover a truth.
An agrument to convince also suprised me. When ever I am trying to convince someone of something I am always thinking of the other persons comeback. Yet I never actually thought that I was doing that. Sure enough when ever I am persuading or convincing someone I am thinking of their opinion and shaping my side to counter act what they might have to say. And that is an argument too.
Even though the first chapter was the author trying to convince me that everything was an argument, I still wasn't fully convinced. Sure he made some good points and it opended my eyes to a new view of arguments but there are somethings that were just a little to much of a strech. such as an argument to explore? I mean yes I can see how exploring a subject can have a lot of sides but it just didn't fit into my newly opened definition of an argument. Exploring anything to me would be considered more of research than arguing. When do you see doctors exploring new ways to fight cancer and they are arguing with themselves or someone else about their new research. How funny would that be to see a doctory yelling at a Petrie Dish? "you darn cancer cells stop arguing with me!" haha
No comments:
Post a Comment