Argument

    We all argue. Every day. Whether it's internally or with others, it is a normal, routine process that we all go through. But what happens when an argument with someone becomes less about working out solutions and more about arguing just for the sake of arguing?

    Unfortunately, this is a common occurrence on social media platforms. The Orleans Hub is a community news site for Orleans County, located in Western New York. In looking for an argument, I stumbled upon a news article posted on the Orleans Hub Facebook page. I chose the argument found in the comment section of this article to write about because it is a good example of why the word "argument" can be associated with anger and hostility. 

    To summarize the article, a man was incarcerated when he was found guilty of being an accomplice to two stabbings. He was sentenced to seven years in state prison. While in prison, the inmate threw human feces at three corrections officers and was therefore sentenced to additional years. It is also stated in the article that he was off mood disorder medication at the time, but there seems to be conflicting information on his regret about the actions. 

    Now if you click on the comment section, and then click again to filter to the "newest", you can scroll down and see the comment that simply says "animal". The replies to this are where the argument occurs. A woman, who identifies herself to be his mother, replies by defending her son from being an animal, and then suggests that maybe we should be thinking about why this event even took place. Although it is understandable that her emotions are strong, her response feels hostile towards those who are commenting insults to her son or praising his incarceration. Again, it is not to say that her feelings are invalid, but when anger and accusations are presented in an argument instead of facts and clarifying information, it has a tendency to spark a negative response. What I used for example #2, is when the individual who commented the word "animal" responded to the mother, telling her that she should have done a better job raising her son. This type of argument places blame on the mother, when no prior knowledge of her or the situation is actually known. It is simply insulting someone and indirectly saying that she is responsible for the acts of her adult son. It is not a constructive argument to gain information, but instead it is a type of "pseudo-argument," where they are arguing just to argue. The mother does respond, giving information that can lead one to believe that she struggled with her son when he was young, reached out for help, and did not receive the help she or her son needed. Then she reminds other commenters that eventually kids grow up and you have no control over their choices and actions. The third negative example is the response to the mother after this last post, made by a different individual. The first thing they do is poke fun at the lack or misuse of punctuation in the mother's writing. Although they follow that by saying throwing feces is a problem, their initial response choice was to personally criticize the mother. Another example of argument that had no real basis in understanding another's experience or viewpoint, was not a search for answers, but was said just to say something in response.

    This situation is an example of a negative argument. Nothing will get accomplished in this way, except for heated emotions, personal insults, and in some cases, threats. A positive view of argument is that it is a peaceful way of learning, problem-solving, and getting issues out into the open. (Anderson) 

• To create more constructive online arguments, the first thing you should do is conduct some research before approaching a topic. Ask the question "WHY?" Gather information so that you can approach the argument with an opinion based on facts and findings, instead of assumptions.
  
• The next thing is to state your argument respectfully. If you are calm and clear on your intentions of truly trying to understand what's being argued, you will be taken more seriously than someone yelling or throwing insults. 
• This brings me to rule three in how to argue more constructively online. Leave out the all-caps and symbols, such as emojis. These can be easily misinterpreted when you can't read the non-verbal cues that are useful to in-person interactions. 
• A fourth rule is to keep an open mind about the other person's viewpoint. Although people may have differing opinions or may come into an argument with opposing facts and information, it is not just about who is "right" or "wrong". It is about learning and sharing. 
• The fifth rule for online argument is to do a perception check. This will be especially helpful in following the fourth rule. Many times, I have experienced a situation where an argument is taking place, but the two individuals are actually arguing the same viewpoint. They both may be hearing or reading the same words, but their perceptions of those words change their meaning for them. By doing a perception check, and by asking for clarity from the other person, you can avoid this type of misunderstanding.

    Argument can be a good thing. It allows us to learn, grow, share ideas, and problem solve with others. The ability to have arguments online can be especially beneficial because we are exposed to a mass amount of people through social media, allowing us to expand our reach and ability to have constructive arguments with others. We just have to treat each other with respect and decency and remember the rules to ensure that we are having true, genuine, experience and knowledge-enhancing arguments.

References:

Anderson, Charles, E. Introduction to Argument. [Video]. Comm 211 Argument Introduction. OSU School of Speech Communication. https://canvas.oregonstate.edu. 

Rivers, Tom. (2025). Medina Man Who Threw Feces at COs in County Jail Gets up to 5 Years in Prison. Orleans Hub. Medina man who threw feces at COs in county jail gets up to 5 years in prison | Orleans Hub