|
|  |
|
|
|
| |
| Jan 14, 2010 4:47 pm |
|
re: re: The ART of ARGUMENT, or I love a good fight on networks? |
Ken Hilving
| |
There are a lot of different directions we can go here.
Let's take an example of a town hall. A citizen is unhappy with an action by the town council, just taken. A group of citizens had been trying to get a specific action taken. Over the course of a year, this group had attended council meetings to confirm what they needed to do in order to present their request properly, had then taken all of those actions, and had then presented their request in accordance with the requirements. The council had first tabled the request in order to review it, and then had cancelled the next two council meetings. This was the first council meeting after the request had been tabled three months earlier. The item was on the agenda, and in fact had been moved up to become the first item of action at the start of the meeting. It is speculated that most citizens in attendance are there in regard to this issue. The item was opened for discussion and two citizens have spoken in support. At that time, the attorney for the council interrupted and strongly urged the council to enter "executive session", which allows the council to meet privately. Citizens were made to leave the meeting hall while the executive session occurred.
On returning to open council meeting, the citizens were informed that their agenda item would not be acted on under advice by their attorney. That advice came in executive session and the citizens are denied any details of the discussion.
The floor is again opened for citizen input. There is a general murmur of side discussions between council members and between various citizens in the audience. A citizen in the front row stands, indicating a desire to speak. The mayor recognizes the citizen, and gestures towards the floor podium and mike.
The citizen looks each council member and the attorney in the eye, gaining their individual attention.
He waits for complete silence.
He then shakes his head in disgust while looking at the council members.
He reaches down and picks up his hat, placing it on his head.
He then turns and walks to the center aisle, from which he can reach the podium.
Instead, he turns his back to the council and walks deliberately to the rear exit.
Each step echoes in the silent meeting room, thanks to a wooden floor and wooden walls of the converted church.
As he walks out, other citizens give looks and gestures of support and agreement (smiles, nods, and thumbs up).
The question is whether or not he was using the "ART of ARGUMENT" characteristics by his actions.
PEAK SHIFT - yes?
GROUPING - maybe?
BALANCE - yes?
CONTRAST - yes?
ISOLATION - yes?
PERCEPTUAL PROBLEM SOLVING - maybe?
SYMMETRY - no?
REPETITION, RHYTHM, ORDERLINESS - yes?
GENERIC PERSPECTIVE - no?
METAPHOR - no?
Would a verbal statement have had as much impact, or stated his position better?Private Reply to Ken Hilving (new win) |
|
| |
|
