Good argument is an aspect that many choose to negate as they ponder the substances of true argument. Argument that will accomplish a specific task needs the special attention that only a well-founded arguer can offer. As we ponder these thoughts we will analyze argument by the thinkers we studied in class and then apply their perspectives according to two themes of argument: Risk and Tension. Finally, we will compare them to the argument I chose (Young White Men Scared, Entitled, and Cynical - A Deadly Combination. By Paul Kivel).
             When either the affirmative or negative argue with one another, certain issues of respect and standards must be followed. An arguer cannot merely attempt to brutally attack his opposition in a way that is disrespectful. Before any offensive tactic is taken a true risk must be taken.
             Initially, risk must be present in any argument. According to Henry Johnstone, Jr., as soon as you take away the option of risk, the argument is finished. A co-arguer may not want to take this risk out of the fear that he may loose the argument (Some Reflections on Argument # 6).
             A main point found in Johnstone's writings on risk is that the co-arguer assumes the risk of having his behavior or beliefs altered by the argument (Some Reflections On Argument # 6-7). The only way the co-arguer can avoid "risk" altogether is to totally close his mind to anything that the offensive arguer proposes. When an arguer closes his mind the argument has ended (Some Reflections On Argument # 3).
             According to Wayne Brockriede's "Where is Argument", there has to be six characteristics in argument. First, an inferential leap from one set of beliefs to another set of beliefs must occur. A good example of this could be found in the attempt to argue that Columbus didn't discover America. In this argument, there is room for that possibility, and this is thus a low-risk argument....