By Deborah Tannen Random Fighting for Our Lives Conflict can’t be avoided in our public lives any more than we can avoid conflict with people we love. Used to express ideas; Talk about everything as if it were a war; “take a shot at it”; “I don’t want to be shot down”; train us to think about & see. Deborah Tannen Fighting for Our , Sep 21, pm, PDF Document (application/pdf), KB, dy.
|Published (Last):||27 May 2011|
|PDF File Size:||6.51 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||19.70 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
On various occasions you related what you were saying at the time back to the main concept. Our society has become overwhelmingly adversarial, with consequences not only in our ability to solve problems but also in our personal relationships.
Talking from 9 to 5. When asked a question pertaining to the most frequent inquiries by clients, Tannen stated that it was regarding the different conversational styles of rannen and women. That’s Not What I Meant!
Abridged Audio Version read by the author.
Response to Deborah Tannen’s essay: The Argument Culture | peternicholas
Exploring how other cultures approach opposition, and discussing the influence of electronic communication in ratcheting up the level of aggression, Tannen shows how we can move toward more constructive dialogue in our public as well our private lives. Thank you Kristine Houston.
Since community is tor blend of connections and authorities, both of which are deteriorating figgting this adversarial attitude, alienation then forms, and the trend spirals communities into states of detachment and hostility.
Tannen is concerned that our culture has become so accustomed to this habit of arguing that we have framed everything into a debate, in which winning or losing is the main concern. In our culture, nearly every topic is emphasized as a battle or argument in which there are definite winners and losers.
She relates the ineffectiveness of the typical spousal arguments to the tactics utilized in ifghting public discourse.
How does the AC debkrah into your own experience and viewpoint? Hi, this is a comment. She explains how the exaggerated use of military and battle related metaphors have the power to influence and shape our opinions, thoughts, and perceptions. In her trademark clear, well-organized style, and generously using examples from her own life, Tannen moves from arena to arena, backing her thesis with plenty of research. Interestingly, despite her efforts I found her writing quite aggressive and argumentative itself.
You Were Always Mom’s Favorite! Video Lectures for Classroom Use. She states that a reporter, upon interviewing her in regard to her new published book, misquoted her. I feel a stronger example could have been used to emphasize the thought differences between men and women.
More on these will be interesting. Unfortunately, her sole offering is to experiment with metaphors other than sports and war, and to utilize expressive formats others than traditional debate style. Create a free website or blog at WordPress. In this light, I feel tannsn also offered her weakest example of her said point. Tannen reported her reply as the necessity to distinguish between biological or cultural styles.
Response to “Fighting for Our Lives” Deborah Tannen – houston_28
This is just one of the many relevant examples Tannen utilized in her writing to illustrate her views. She has observed that, while conflict and opposition are needed in a dialogue just as much as cooperation and agreement, the scale has been tipped, with conflict and opposition being overweighed.
Response to Deborah Tannen’s essay: The Argument Culture
This book will change forever livfs you see forces that powerfully shape our lives, and suggests new ways of reaching our goals.
It also encourages people to look for irrelevant rhetorical weaknesses in the opposing argument, rather than listening to the important matters at hand. To emphasize this point, Tannen refers to a scientific study in which participants viewed a video of two cars colliding.
The war on drugs, the battle of the sexes, politicians’ turf battles—war metaphors pervade our talk and shape our thinking, urging us to approach anything we need to accomplish as a fight between two opposing sides. While the reader is susceptible to criticizing the validity of this very writing through labeling Tannen a social skeptic, she does conclude the work with various alternate methods to this solution.
Tannen traces this vighting to the history of our educational system, and shows its roots among boys at play.