Deliberate conflict: argument, political theory, and composition classes

Abstract

In Deliberate Conflict: Models of the Public Sphere and the Teaching of Argument, Patricia Roberts-Miller argues that much current discourse about argument pedagogy is hampered by fundamental unspoken disagreements over what democratic public discourse should look like. The book's pivotal question asks: in what kind of public discourse do we want our students to engage? To answer this, the text provides a taxonomy, discussion, and evaluation of political theories underpinning democratic discourse, highlighting the relationship between various models of the public sphere and rhetorical theory. Roberts-Miller seeks to diffuse student antagonism toward argumentation challenging the assumption that the nature of public participation is implicit. She holds that the lack of awareness of different models of democracy in argument pedagogy is not an indication of consensus. To address this concern, she provides a range of theories, discussing the major features and rhetorical applicability of the liberal, the interest-based, the communitarian, and the deliberative models of the public domain. Deliberate Conflict makes a cogent case for reintegrating instruction in argumentation into the composition curriculum. By linking the ability to argue effectively in the public sphere with the ability to effect social change, Roberts-Miller pushes compositionists beyond a simplistic Aristotelian conception of how argumentation works, and offers a means by which to prepare students for active participation in public discourse.