Roots of Debate and Hope of Dialog

In this essay by Tannen she talks about how our society has basically been raised to argue a point because it is "...so easy to do" and gives good reasons why this might not always be the best method for a lot of people while it may be good for others, and gives so great ideas about how to look at things in a different perspective.
The big problem with debate it is pretty much the easy way out as Tannen looks at it. If two people or groups just get up and argue, there are only opinions being put out, and trying to out do the other person or group with no real learning going on. The first thing people want to do is prove that they are right and show them why it is that way. This may show the other why it is that way but it doesn't allow them to come to that conclusion for themself. It is kind of like the addage, "give a man a fish you feed him for a day, Teach him how to fish feed him for a lifetime." If the debaters are both stubborn and refuse to learn from the other then I go to this quote "A man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still." It is more important to help students and others to think analyze and learn rather than to just have as many get involved in a debate as possible.
On way Tannon mentions is to follow the method Proffesor Peter Elbow uses, read or listen as if you beleive and then see where it takes you. Instead of pointing out all the negative things look for positive things to focus on. You don't have to agree with everything to do this. Doing this Tannon says will make the critique look smarter. For example you can see in a research report showing some sort of problem and that has been worked out to a solution. You may not agree with the solution but can notice that the start or middle of the process that was worked out is very good and on the right track up to a point of some kind. Then expand and build from that point on. In short I would echo what was said by the man who attended the human development seminar "I don't have to make others wrong to prove that I'm right."
I feel Tannen uses a lot of good ethos in this paper to prove her point without saying one way is wrong or "making others wrong." Her ideas don't really go into that argumentitive stage she talks about but takes the reader into the idea helping them really think about this essay.