Writing is Universal

After reading the first chapters of Joseph Harris's book, I’ve come to the realization that calling his piece of writing a “book” would be incorrect.  Rather, it is more of a guide, a guide to academic writing.  The main difference between Sullivan and Harris lies within the type of writing each is portraying.  While Sullivan focuses on the more personal side of writing, blogs, Harris’s focus is that of an academic portrayal.  However, Harris believes that in writing, even in the case of an academic paper, one should always write in one’s own words.  This is similar to Sullivan’s belief that writing in your own words creates intellectual growth.  Still, because Harris focuses on the academic side of writing, he proposes methods that are very analytical, the purpose being straightforward and concise.   There are several large similarities between Sullivan and Harris on what the purpose of writing should be.  Among them are the ability to push beyond the sorts of bipolar oppositions (Harris, 25), and the obtainment of new information as a result of a new perspective (Harris, 20).  Sullivan’s purpose for blogging is to create rational discussions among people with differing opinions. Why? Because while he understands this will result in the clashing of ideas, he also realizes that it will also produce a consensus.  The same can be said of new perspectives.  Sullivan understands, as does Harris, that when we are exposed to new ideas or ways of thinking, we are more inclined to leave our current preconceptions and develop new ones.  So, writing is therefore, regardless of form, a method of engaging others and attempting to reach a common truth.