The most important skill that we practice in fight club is
framing our arguments as responses to others. This ability is important because
it gives your audience a reason to care about your argument. It also helps make
one’s argument more convincing by forcing us to consider possible objections to
our positions and preemptively address those concerns in our own writings.
Debates are the perfect tool to develop this ability because you are directly
engaging another person, so you have a clear position to argue against.
However, these skills do not always transfer easily to other assignments
because in fight club the pro and con of each argument is clearer. When we do
our fight club debates each side is clearly defined and we don’t have to come
up with our own positions. In order to write papers like our final paper we
have to define the sides ourselves. This can make things more difficult because
if you are proposing a new idea there may not be a clear opposing view for you
to argue against, especially if there are several other alternative proposals
already in the conversation. It is also much harder to respond to possible
criticisms when writing a paper because you don’t have access to immediate feedback
like you do when debating in person. This means we have to try to anticipate
every possible counter to our own arguments before hand, which is a useful
practice, but not always an easy one. One benefit to writing as opposed to
arguing verbally is you do have more time to prepare your arguments and collect
evidence which can help make the arguments you are preparing more convincing.
I agree that Fight Club allowed us to grow in ways that we could anticipate a rebuttal in a debate. Do you think Fight Club would be more intense if we could choose our stance in the argument?
ReplyDelete