When doing my own research, I have framed my argument to be more conversation like so my research it will be a sort of dialogue in which I will be responding to the question like an everyday conversation. I am only research privacy because I have an interest in privacy and I enjoy looking into it. It does not feel like something forced for school rather it is something I can enjoy. If I enjoy the topic and research I think that will allow it to be framed in a more personal context and feel like a dialogue.
Reading Greene’s writing he talks about framing your question as a way to be able to get to certain kinds of information that you are looking for. You want to frame a question so that it can grow from the original question and create tension making it easier to argue. He also talks about framing just in general for research and talks about how you frame to identify what lens you are using to speak to your audience and grab them. Depending on how someone frames and argument will also depend on their stance on the argument. When reading my article, that I got from looking at Turkle’s sources, I saw a frame of the author taking a negative view on personalized ads and saying what they do to us as people.
I think reading Argument as Conversation did not necessarily change my view on reading/writing about research but rather it just emphasized the points we talk about in class. The points we talked about in class that Greene talks about as well are that we need to dig deeper and find something that would be used in something like an everyday conversation. One of the ideas we have not really said is that “it is important to frame an issue in the context of some specific situation.” I think the biggest point is that when choosing something to research is that it should be something that you are interested in.