When dealing with such issues as immigration and the definition of success, a discussion could really go anywhere. In an ideal conversation, the participants must stay on task. Participants must know when they are getting off topic. Another must for a conversation is disagreements because without disagreements the conversation becomes quite bland. Not only does the conversation become bland, but only one side of an issue is exposed. When people begin agreeing with everything that everyone says, only one side of an argument is exposed. It seems that in order to fully discuss an issue from every angle, someone must be playing "devil's advocate." Also, everyone must show respect regarding all particpants and their oppinions.
How does this ideal conversation compare to our discussion on Tuesday? Well first of all everyone was very respectful. There were few interuptions and no blood was shed. There could have been less personal experiences, because that caused us to go off on a few too many tangents. There was not enough disagreements. This goes hand in hand with the personal experiences. People were afraid to disagree with eachother's personal experiences which resulted in little disagreement. We all agreed with eachother and were continually building upon one side of the issue. It is not a bad thing to build off what each other is saying, but when it happens too much only one side of the issue is talked about.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment