In my own words value is the reason behind something. When I think of a value statement for a company I think about why the company does what it does. When I think about a value in an argument it's normally what that person cares about. This even is a factor in a physical item, when you value something in your life or an object it normally means you care about that thing deeply or that you love that item. This is the same when talking about a value in an argument. Sometimes the value is going to be explicitly said and sometimes the speaker or the writer just assumes that their audience will fill in the desired value. What's interesting about values, is almost every argument will have at least one but some arguments can have multiple. An example of a possible value would be: "Smoking a vape is hazardous to your health. " I am explicitly stating that smoking a vape is harmful for a person and it can be implied then that I don't agree with smoking a vape. It also can be implied that I most likely care about this topic and that's why I am speaking to it and arguing about it. Some other factors that might contribute to a value statement could be, When you compare 2 things, when you evaluate an idea, when you are advantageous or disadvantageous etc. A value statement can be many different things but I believe it's important when making an argument to make it as explicit as possible. I understand that some people might not do this, but I believe if you are going to be fighting and making an argument your value should be not only present but strongly present. You want people to be reminded of why you care and what your top beliefs/priorities are! I mean isn't that why you make an argument in the first place? Exactly.
There were a couple of terms I found in this chapter that I wish were explained a little more. First, the concept of uncritical responses to refutation is only covered briefly. I think that this is one of the most fundamental barriers to effective public argumentation in the United States right now. I find this issue most concerning for the liberal party. Recalling the last election and the concept of 'incremental' argumentation, I feel that people demonstrated a massive failure of critical thinking by voting for third parties or not voting. People who were disappointed with Hillary Clinton's candidacy in place of Bernie Sanders decided to either continue voting for Bernie or not vote altogether. Neither of these strategies amounted to effective support of their cause, and they constitute the uncritical "knee-jerk" reaction described in this chapter. In this case, uncritical response to opposition worked directly against the interests of the decision-makers. A...
Overall, I found your post to be very relatable and I agree with a lot of the statements that you made. I agree that value is the reason behind most things as values are what drive people to do things or how they make decisions. It seems like whenever we are about to do something, we always consider our values before doing it, and whether or not our values will align with those actions. Also, I agree with your statement that we should try to make value statements explicitly. By explicitly stating a value statement, one makes their wants known and shows other that they care. However, this is not always easy as some have a hard time openly expressing their wants or openly sharing their values.
ReplyDelete