Introduction
Argumentation
“Fake news” is a phrase you’ve encountered way more than you would have liked since the 2016 U.S. presidential election. While this phrase has gained more and more momentum and traction, it holds different purposes and meanings in different contexts. Across all these different rhetorical situations, though, we can agree that the popularization of the phrase speaks to an increased skepticism toward the bodies of knowledge that surround us.
Such distrust points to the oversimplified dichotomy of fact vs. opinion. The gray area between fact and opinion is much broader than we like to believe, and often we present deeply entrenched opinions as if they were facts. (Whether or not it is intentional, this phenomenon has serious consequences.) As Michael Kinsley points out in his 1995 essay, American individualist ideology dictates that citizens be “omni-opinionated” – at the expense of having many poorly informed opinions. It is crucial, Kinsley says that we take two steps to confront the “intellectual free lunch”:
- Develop increased humility about what we can and do know to be true; and
- Increase the intensity and frequency of our critical interrogation of truth (or what seems to be true).
Because, yes, there is a lot of fake news out there. And there’s a lot of real news that certain people insist is fake. How do we mobilize skepticism to produce a more ethical world rather than letting it undermine the pursuit of truth?
To a nonconfrontational person, argument is a dirty word. It surfaces connotations of raised voices, slammed doors, and dominance; it arouses feelings of anxiety and frustration.
But argument is not inherently bad. In fact, as a number of great thinkers have described, conflict is necessary for growth, progress, and community cohesion. Through disagreement, we challenge our common sense assumptions and seek compromise. The negative connotations surrounding ‘argument’ actually point to a failure in the way that we argue.
Check out this video on empathy. It provides useful insight into the listening, thinking, and discussion required for productive arguments.
