Brad Armstrong
October 19th, 2009
Professor Christy Vance
Fight, Bicker, or Argue?
Wouldn’t it be wonderful if we could all learn to argue the way Bruce Ballenger teaches? Well-constructed, intelligent, persuasive arguments would be the norm. Reasonable discussion and constructive conflict would pervade society. Societal and governmental issues that cause so much hate and harm today might instead be a platform for mutual understanding and growth.
I enjoyed reading the observations and instruction this piece provides on argument and inquiry; their differences and uses. In applying the material to my own ideas of what an argument is, as well as to the beginnings of my own argument for this unit, I realize that I am writing more from an argument standpoint, rather than from open-minded inquiry. As I continue to shape my ideas and form an outline, I am excited to put Ballenger’s methods to the test.
I don’t believe I am able to begin with “no initial opinion or belief,” as he states as the first step of his “Open Model of Argument.” I have begun this paper with a number of preconceptions that slant my writing, and even my research, in one direction. Although I don’t expect my ideas to change through further research, I am genuinely interested in exploring other sides to the issue I have chosen to investigate. Whether I choose to maintain my current position or not, the investigation of other points of view will add depth and credibility to my argument, as well as assisting me in gaining greater understanding and appreciation for those who embrace other belief systems.
There is one point with which cannot entirely agree. Ballenger asks a questions, “Rather than either for, can it be both/and? Instead of two sides to every issue, might there be thirteen?” He continues on to state that he clearly believes that there are many sides to every argument.
While I am in agreement that there are many opinions available on nearly every subject, there is something to be said for making decisions and choosing sides. While this open-minded model of argument may be useful in social circles to discuss issues without offending, it is not helpful when applied to real life. Every person must develop for him or herself a code of ethics, or a set of behavioral standards by which to live. If not, we must surrender ourselves to society, tossed to and fro with every change in political or social mood.
The most influential people throughout history are those who have chosen a side and have stood for it. Lincoln, Hitler, Darwin, and Mohammed all picked a side and argued it. I for one would choose to follow in their footsteps and stand for something rather than fall for anything.