ARGUMENTATION IN A CULTURE OF DSCORD

Jordan Erekson

Humanities 1100

Period 6

ARGUMENTATION IN A CULTURE OF DSCORD

The general argument/point made by Frank L. Cioffi in his work ARUGUMENTATION IN A CULTURE OF DISCORD is that people when in arguments or even talking to each other can be misunderstood or misunderstand the other person in the conversation. Words have different meanings and its how the other person decodes it is how they will receive it. More specifically, Cioffi argues/suggests that part of the problem of teaching argumentative writing is the “argument” means “heated, contentious verbal dispute”. He writes writes “argument” means “heated, contentious verbal dispute”. (page 63). In this passage, Cioffi is suggesting that people are misread and misunderstood part of the time in conversations. In conclusion, it is Cioffi's belief that we must be clear in what we are saying and what we are trying to say when in a conversation with another person.

In my view, Cioffi is correct because I know for a fact that when I am talking to some other people I get the weird looks from them because they don't fully understand what I am saying when talking to them. They will sometimes misinterpret the words coming out of my mouth. For example, Say I were in an argument and I said “You want to go?” The person could either think that I want to get in a fight with them, or they could possibly think that I am just telling them that they need to leave.

Although Cioffi might object that some people use words in conversations that can not be misunderstood very often, I maintain that there is a way to misread and misunderstand words that people are saying no matter what. Therefore, I conclude that when in an argument be careful to listen to the words that are coming out of the other persons mouth, so that you don't misread them.