Logan Duncan
ENG 122
Nathan Huseman
9 February 2016
Agonism in Academic Discourse Analytical Response Paper
The 2002 release of “Agonism in Academic Discourse” by author Deborah Tannen, professor of linguistics at Georgetown University, proposes a new method of debate, or rather any discourse found in academe. This new form of discourse – new only in the sense of its possible wide use – is not dominated by agonism, defined by Tannen as ritualized adversativeness, but rather cooperation among scholars in pursuit of uncovering true knowledge through productive and analytical conversation. Conversation being a superior term to describe Tannen’s proposal than debate, a sharing of ideas as equals with no perception of winning or losing - closer in relation to the Socratic method; wherein debate is often perceived as a battle in which winning is the object and brings to mind politics and other crude forms of
…show more content…
This is due to a shared distaste for a gotcha, big-headed, and win at all costs discourse. The competition, while creating a certain drive amongst individuals, can not come at the expense of honesty and due process. Tannen is correct in that the NEED to win requires “scholars to (1) at best oversimplify, at worst distort or even misrepresent others’ positions; (2) search for the most foolish statement and the weakest examples to make a generally reasonable treaties appear less so; and (3) ignore facts that support the opponent’s views and cite only those that support theirs.” A form of competition/debate, I believe, without these flaws would be the most desirable - I am aware that due to the length of this essay I have committed to some extent all these, therefore making me somewhat of a hypocrite - in creating an environment that allows scholars and students alike to advance humanity's