Harris on Countering

Harris’s chapter on countering begins with a part of a Monty Python skit that is supposed to be a paid for argument. However it is obvious that it is no argument, but it is blatant contradiction. I think Harris chose to use this as an opening example to try and show that his idea of countering another’s position is in no way supposed to be straight contradiction, but a civil and scholarly process. As Harris puts it, (and I forward it) “Countering looks at other views and texts not as wrong but as partial- in the sense of being both interested and incomplete.”(56) He then goes on to say, “the aim of countering is to develop a new line of thinking in response to the limits of other texts.”(57) So countering is not what I originally thought, there just so happens to be a much more involved process. Harris describes three different ways in which we counter another’s works; they are Arguing the other side, Uncovering, and lastly Dissenting. All of which begin with the understanding or coming to terms with the text, because one must understand both the strong and weak points of a text to be able to intelligently talk about it let alone work against it.

In the Phog Blog it is almost fun to see the ways in which the author counters the national pollsters and sports analysts. He has created a new type of ranking system within the big 12 that in a lot of ways goes against the typical system, but it makes so much more sense! That in my eyes is a great counter.