Minimum

Read each class response below and respond to each response with a minimum 75 of words. For example, you might want to share an example in your own life that relates to the experiences they shared. You might offer other ways in which we can learn to embody the kind of humility that the speaker advocates. Let your response further the goal of the learning from arguments.

1.What is an area of life in which you have experienced people treating arguments as a kind of war?

I've experienced this in my professional life where I have witnessed disagreements between two opposing sides. Rather than advancing the argument through rational and logical discussion, I've seen the argument descend into malicious rhetoric because neither party has been able to overlook or tolerate the fact that the opposing side does not agree with their perspective.

What were the consequences of that approach?

The consequence of this approach is that the argument resulted in a hostile atmosphere in which both parties were tense and uneasy with one another. Communication came to a halt and was not able to proceed forward in a professional manner, causing an unpleasant feeling for everybody else that was present.

What is an area of life in which you have experienced people treating arguments as a kind of performance?

I've experienced this in my past relationships where I've argued with exes in public or in front of family members (neither of which I'm proud). Instead of giving in and apologising, when I've been conscious of people watching me, I've made sure that I haven't looked weak or given in. I've also turned to family members and looked for validation in the claims I was making.

Was that approach effective?

I don't think this approach was effective. It is an approach based heavily on ego and did nothing to move forward arguments and conversations.

Why is it better to treat arguments as a venue for learning?

I think it's important to treat arguments as a venue for learning because it is an avenue through which we can gain different perspectives and opinions which are far removed from our own. Through mature and receptive arguments we can eventually begin to understand one another better. Also we may be humbled by realising that our arguments are not deductive and full of fallacies which we may not have seen had we not engaged in argument.

What traits of character does it require to be able to live according to that approach?

If we apply the principles of accuracy and charity, we might be able to live by that approach. The principle of accuracy ensures that carefully interpret an argument as the speaker intended, whereas the principle of charity assumes that we 'give our opponent (and his or her corresponding argument) our utmost care andattention, always seeking to understand the position presented in its strongest and most defensible lightbefore subjecting the argument to scrutiny' (Hardy, Foster and Postigo, 2015).

What benefits can it have in our lives to take that approach? Provide a specific example.

Taking this approach might benefit our lives by making us less confrontational and more passionate about arriving at the truth. Finally, by applying these principles we may develop the skills and character which will enable us to make good decisions whilst being in control of our own biases (Hardy et al., 2015). An example of this is when I get into arguments with my wife about house chores. If I adopt these two principles I might be less arrogant in my standing and more willing to understand and accept her version of 'truth'. Gutierez

References:

Hardy, J., Foster, C., & Zúñiga y Postigo, G. (2015).  With good reason: A guide to critical thinking . Retrieved from  https://content.ashford.edu/Links to an external site.

2. One area of my life in which people have treated arguments as war is politics.  In the last few elections, especially the 2016 presidential election, neither side has wanted to listen to the other.  Both sides have been guilty of trying to simply push their opinion on the other in a “my way or the highway” approach.  Since neither side is interested in what the other has to say, I found that people have either avoided the topic or worse, learned to avoid one another altogether.  I know people who have still steadfastly refused to speak to people they had once considered friends simply because of their support for one of the candidates.

Insofar as the performance variety of argumentative approach, I had personally used this when I was an Air Force recruiter.  I routinely put on “performances” in high schools to attempt to persuade students that a career in the Air Force was in their best interest.  I would say that my use of the approach was somewhat effective, in that I did sway some students to ultimately make the decision to join. 

I think that the use of arguments for learning is best because it creates a dialogue.  It is better to approach a difference of opinion as an opportunity for learning and growth than to try to prove you are right.  To live by this requires one to set aside their pride and accept that they may be wrong.  This requires humility, a trait which many humans struggle to develop, but one which will open the door to learning.  If we live according to the “arguments = learning” approach, we can expect to gain not only a greater understanding of the world and those around us but also greater respectability.  Someone open to the perspectives of others will be seen as a good listener, and most likely as someone people like to have around.  When the goal is to achieve learning we are not pushing our point of view onto others or viewing them even as opponents.

One example from my own life has been religion.  When I discuss religion, I do not attempt to sway anyone to my way of thinking.  I approach the subject from more of a position of curiosity.  I try to understand their beliefs no matter how different they are from my own.  This has meant that I have been able to discuss this sensitive topic with a variety of people of different points of view without getting defensive or emotional and has allowed both parties to leave the discussion with a greater knowledge of each other’s beliefs.Wolfrangel

3. What is an area of life in which you have experienced people treating arguments as a kind of war?

Unfortunately, I have been a part of arguments in which I felt like it became a war of words. Not to get too personal about my life but, I tend to get into intense arguments with my ex often when it comes to my oldest daughter.  No matter what the situation is, 8 times out of 10 our conversation eventually goes south.

What were the consequences of that approach?

The consequences of this approach caused unnecessary added animosity between us and ultimately upset the most important pieces to our relationship, our daughter.

What is an area of life in which you have experienced people treating arguments as a kind of performance?

I’ve often experienced these types of arguments in my professional life.  In the military people are respected by their rank.  The higher ranking you are, the more people respect you.  I might not like the individual but I will respect the rank.  During staff meetings when all leadership is present, there is always an argument between two individuals of the same rank who thinks they are right about everything.  With leadership present, the argument becomes more intensified, because both parties want to prove themselves as the most knowledgeable and experienced member of the flight.

Was that approach effective? 

No, the approach wasn’t effective because it was obvious to everyone that these two individuals were trying to prove a point and instead of showing leadership a one team one fight mentality, they did the exact opposite and eventually had to be called out in front of everyone about being professional and working together.   

Why is it better to treat arguments as a venue for learning?

Treating an argument as a venue for learning can benefit both parties.  Majority of the time when we engage in arguments it is because we feel strongly in our beliefs.  This is not always a good thing.  When we learn to think objectively and listen to the other side of the argument, we might find that our personal beliefs are not as accurate as we thought they were and we might have a chance to learn something from the opposing side.

What traits of character does it require to be able to live according to that approach?

The traits of character required to be able to live according to the stated approach would be applying the principles of Accuracy and Charity.  Our reading states the principle of accuracy requires that you interpret any argument as closely as possible to the actual statement of the argument while paying attention to features of context (Hardy, Foster and Postigo, 2015).  Many of us fall victim to this because we hear what we want to hear instead of clarifying what was actually being said.  Our reading also states that when applying the principle of charity, it is important to remember that the goal of logic is not to win disputes but rather to arrive at the truth (Hardy, Foster and Postigo, 2015).  This is done by objectively trying to understand the opposing argument before dissecting it.

 What benefits can it have in our lives to take that approach?

Taking this approach can benefit our lives by forcing us to think critically and logically about our own arguments.  There is nothing like going hard in an argument and end up being wrong. Not only does it make you look bad but also it makes you question your thoughts and beliefs.  If you make a habit of thinking objectively, you can avoid unnecessary stressors and may learn something new. Johnson

Hardy, J., Foster, C., & Zúñiga y Postigo, G. (2015).  With good reason: A guide to critical thinking . Retrieved from  https://content.ashford.edu/Links to an external site.