In Rewriting Joseph Harris his offers three ways to counter the text we are reading. I personally find it easier to use the method of “arguing the other side” easier to counter. Arguing the other side offers the chance to show the other side of what the author is saying. Even if you agree or disagree with the author you can argue the other side of the text and opinion on the text. Harris defines Arguing the other side as, “Showing the usefulness of a term or idea that a writer has criticized or noting problems with one that she or he has argued for” (57).
Giddens uses a lot of examples from other authors to make the base of his arguments. Some of them he will going into detail and explain his arguments and others he will touch and very briefly and not provide a lot of detail into his argument. As we all know Giddens wrote this book many years ago and a lot has changed since he has written the book. This makes it easier for us to argue the other side of his arguments because there has been change and we could have a complete different view on what he is trying to prove or argue. Giddens says “neither design faults nor operator failure are the most important elements producing the erratic character of modernity” (152). Giddens is saying that every things comes with design faults and like we all know we are humans that operate the equipment and a human isn’t perfect. Will the abstract system ever completely fail? We know parts could fail by human error or equipment design fault but will it every completely fail?
Before the abstract system and in pre modernity there was also human error. Giddens doesn’t go into detail in his argument about that at all. Like I have said in this blog before we all know humans are not perfect and there will always without a doubt be some type of error when humans are involved in the operation of something. They may not have noticed it as much because of the updated modern equipment that is used in any operation today compared to the equipment that was use back in the day. This isn’t anything new to society it is just noticed more today than it was before or even when Giddens had written his book. With the abstract system in place there are more highly qualified people working on operations so when a mistake or error is made we notice the error a lot sooner and it seems to be a lot bigger but in reality there are most likely less errors accruing then before the system was in place. This leads in the key term of trust. We are putting a lot of trust into the people that are working within the system that everything done right and there are no faults or errors that happen and to keep the system running smoothly. We trust companies when order things offline that the right item that you order will arrive to your home and it not be something you didn’t order or that it never shows up after that have taken your money. I believe we all know that the chance of an error is there and it is a high chance be we have built the trust that we feel comfortable allowing the system to continue to operate.