1. What is Cohen’s main claim? That there are numerous different versions of arguing, and losing the argument is not always a bad thing. He also talks about the ways to argue, he is trying to make the point that just because it is an “argument” does not always mean its an actual argument, due to the different variations of arguing.
2. What main points does he use to support his claim? His three main points were the different types of arguing. The first type was arguments as war, referring to when someone is mad, causing shouting and anger. The second type was arguments as proofs, these are the ones that have to do with actual proof, such as when a math teacher is solving a problem and is proving a problem. Lastly, he discussed arguments as performances. Arguments as performances refer to when someone is trying to present something to a group, such as a politicians. He also states that other people chime in during an audience argument.
3. What ideas in this talk were new to you? The ideas that were new to me during this talk were the various types of arguing. When I think of an argument, I think of one thing and that one thing is a fight. From this video I learned how different arguments work and what they mean.
4. After watching this talk, what questions and/or counterarguments do you have for Cohen? I thought that everything he stated was accurate. I did not necessarily have any questions and or counterarguments, I simply felt as if he made me grab a better understanding on what exactly an argument is.
5. How might ideas from this video be useful to you as you continue to work on Project #3? I think that this video will be useful to project #3 because I am arguing what I believe within a thesis. I will have to persuade my audience and argue for them to believe in what I am stating.