expos rough draft 3

expos rough draft 3 - 1 David Reiter Section AT Assignment...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
1 David Reiter Section AT Assignment 3 Final Draft October 11, 2007 Communicating to Express In the midst of the presidential debate, the two candidates rehearse and practice their responses to all potential questions. Two presidential candidates, with opposing views on most vital issues arguing in a controlled setting is what Deborah Tannen would simply describe as arguing. In her essay “The Roots of Debate and the Hope of Dialogue,” Tannen looks deep into the effects of argument. In “Reading Lolita in Tehran,” Azar Nafisi would see this as the candidate’s way of fighting for what they believe in. Virginia Postrel’s opinion in “Surface and Substance” would be that the candidates were expressing their own original ideas to the country by communication. Sure, our expression on the surface says a lot about who we are as individuals, but what you say and how you say it has a much bigger effect on someone’s impression of you. Although these three authors do have different views and opinions, they all connect and are not polar opposites; each would agree that we use communication to express our personal opinions and that it is certainly one of the best forms of expression. Deborah Tannen sees arguing not as a bad thing, but as a productive activity if done correctly. Two people with completely opposite views would just clash in an argument. There will be no winner, only losers because no points will get across. Arguments can shed light on thoughts and ideas that you may have never thought of before. Arguing should not be done in a hostile environment where there is animosity between both parties. It should be done in a constructive manner where both parties have a chance to speak and articulate their ideas appropriately. Deborah Tannen feels that when you are arguing you should not “demonize those
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
2 with whom you disagree”(626). Do not hate your opponent; rather, find a way to properly respect your opponent and his or her viewpoint. Articulating your own original ideas in an argument is how many people express their individuality through communication. Virginia Postrel, however, is more concerned about the ability of expression rather than the specifics of arguing. She would look deeper into Tannen’s opinions on arguing and feel that sharing your opinion in a productive way is certainly part of expression. Postrel would define someone’s inner thoughts and feelings as their “substance.” When someone’s “substance” is being argued it is expressing the inside feelings and it comes out on the “surface.” That is how surface and substance can co-exist. “The value of design itself—function, meaning, and pleasure—can exist
Background image of page 2
Image of page 3
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 04/04/2008 for the course ENGLISH 101 taught by Professor Smith during the Fall '07 term at Rutgers.

Page1 / 6

expos rough draft 3 - 1 David Reiter Section AT Assignment...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 3. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online