Countering
is usually seen, within the guise of a debate, as refuting your opponent’s argument
and proving it invalid, therefore, proving your side and winning. However, for Harris this differs. Countering
is similar to forwarding, based off the notation the neither wishes to end a
discussion nor are they truly a debate.
Countering, like forwarding, is used to keep a conversation going. “But
the aim of countering is to open up new lines of inquiry” (Harris, 57). Harris identifies three ways to achieve this:
arguing the other side, uncovering values, and dissenting. But the key to
countering, as put by Harris, is civility.
Arguing the other side: A relatively straightforward concept;
putting a positive spin on what an author does not approve of or a negative
spin on what an author does approve of.
Uncovering Values: Bringing attention to a word or phrase
that a text has left “unexamined” or “undefined” and then analyzing it.
Dissenting: Recognizing a common theme of thought on an
topic in order to note its limits.
Instead of
finding a recent blog or article that exemplifies this concept of countering, I
feel it would be easier to revisit one that I already know. Andrea A Lunsford, who I made repeated
references to in past posts, was the author of the article Our Semi-Literate Youth? Not So Fast. For those of you who may not remember,
Lunsford was a professor and department chair for the Writing Program at
Stanford University. She and her
colleagues researched the effects of today’s modern technology on the literary
capabilities of today’s youth. In her
published article, Lunsford makes use of a type of countering; the one that
Harris mentions. She begins by acknowledging the “grain of truth” that skeptics
and critics have over today’s literary capacities, but she quickly makes use of
uncovering the values that today’s
technology have given to literacy that opponents often overlook. “But rather than leading to a new illiteracy,
these activities seemed to help them develop a range of repertoire of writing styles, and formats along with a range of abilities”
(Lunsford).
Lunsford argues
the other side by citing what the opposition often does not acknowledge,
but in a civil way that Harris would advocate. This is an example of dissenting, taking the common views over technology that opponents
have, and decisively proving how their views are limited. Lunsford is a prime example of Harris’s
countering because she not only argues the opposing side, with civility, but
she ends her article by addressing the new directional idea of whether it is
teachers who are becoming semi-literate, not youth.
I like how you used one of our past class articles for an example in this post. :)
ReplyDelete