I'm in debate. Let me get that out of the way, since it sometimes seems to monopolize even my friends' descriptions of me. It's not that I'm particularly keen on arguing, although sometimes it does provide me an inner joy to play devil's advocate. There's just something intriguing about debate in that there isn't a wrong argument. There's always going to be a better argument you could have made, but there's support behind even the most gibberish nonsense it can sound persuasive. Al Gore talks of climate change being a global impending doom unless we cut our carbon emissions; however, how many people have heard of the scientists who suggest warming is good because of the carbon dioxide needed to grow plants, or the melting arctic ice caps to release more oil?
I don't want to try to convince people that they're wrong. Yet, I want them to question how they know they're not wrong. I don't think enough people think critically about an issue they claim to support. What assumptions behind issues like climate change do I make when I proclaim how proud I am for making an 'eco-conscious' decision? That it's bad? Says who?
Are those assumptions bad?
Well, we'll see each topic... I'll try tackling the most relevant/recent current events first but feel free to suggest an issue in the comments section!
Alyssa,
ReplyDeleteThis is a terrific first post! I love how you chose to start with the Debate comment. And how you connected your argument to the current "eco-conscious" movement. Your writing was nice and brief, which suits your topic. I can't wait to see what assumptions you challenge or debunk, and to see what others have to say in response.-- Kate H
P.S. You might want to check out the Freakonomics blog. It is really related to your ideas.