Levels of Disagreement Over Contested Practices

Eric O. Silva

doi:10.18778/1733-8077.9.4.03

Authors

Eric O. Silva Georgia Southern University, U.S.A.

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18778/1733-8077.9.4.03

Keywords:

Framing, Laminations, Indian Mascots, Evolutionary Theory, Intelligent Design

Abstract

This article unravels the tangled threads of argumentation that can be found in public debate over institutional practices. An analysis of letters to the editor (n=1551) written about two contested practices (American Indian mascots and the exclusive teaching of evolutionary theory) uncovers three analytically distinct levels of disagreement in the discourse. In the first level, partisans debate the effects of keeping or eliminating the contested practice. This disagreement over consequences leads to a second disagreement over how the social criteria for adjudicating controversies apply to the situation. This application level sits atop a third foundational level of the discourse where partisans debate the nature of social reality and the definition of the rules.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biography

Eric O. Silva, Georgia Southern University, U.S.A.

Eric O. Silva, Ph.D. UC Davis, is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Sociology and Anthropology at Georgia Southern University. His research focuses on how people define contested practices (e.g., Indian mascots, evolutionary theory, and immigration policy) in public communication.

References

Benford, Robert D. 1993. “Frame Disputes within the Nuclear Disarmament Movement.” Social Forces 71(3):677-701.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2579890

Benford, Robert D. 1997. “An Insider’s Critique of the Social Movement Framing Perspective.” Sociological Inquiry 67(4):409-430.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-682X.1997.tb00445.x

Benford, Robert D. and David A. Snow. 2000. “Framing Processes and Social Movements: An Overview and Assessment.” Annual Review of Sociology 26:11-39.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.26.1.611

Binder, Amy. 2007. “Gathering Intelligence on Intelligent Design: Where did it come from where is it going, and how should progressives manage it?” American Journal of Education 113(4):549-576.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/518488

Blumer, Herbert. 1969. Symbolic Interaction: Perspective and Method. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Google Scholar

Callais, Todd M. 2010. “Controversial Mascots: Authority and Racial Hegemony in the Maintenance of Deviant Symbols.” Sociological Focus 43(1):65-81.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00380237.2010.10571369

Coy, Patrick G. and Lynne M. Woehrle. 1996. “Constructing Identity and Creating Oppositional Knowledge: The Framing Processes of Peace Movement Organizations during the Persian Gulf War.” Sociological Spectrum 16(3):287-327.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/02732173.1996.9982134

Cress, Daniel M. and David A. Snow. 2000. “The Outcomes of Homeless Mobilization: The Influence of Organization, Disruption, Political Mediation, and Framing.” American Journal of Sociology 105(4):1063-1104.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/210399

Entman, Robert M. 1993. “Framing: Toward Clarification of a Fractured Paradigm.” Journal of Communication 43(4):51-58.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.1993.tb01304.x

Goffman, Erving. 1974. Frame Analysis: An Essay on the Organization of Experience. Boston: Northeastern University Press.
Google Scholar

Hedley, Mark M. and Sarah A. Clark. 2007. “The Microlevel Discourse of Social Movement Framing: Debating Antiwar Protests on a University Listserv.” Sociological Focus 40(1):26-47.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00380237.2007.10571297

King, C. Richard. 2004. “This Is Not an Indian: Situating Claims about Indianness in Sporting Worlds.” Journal of Sport and Social Issues 28(1):3-10.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0193-723503261147

Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District. 2005. Case 4:04-cv-02688-JEJ. Retrieved May 18, 2012 http://ncse.com/files/pub/legal/kitzmiller/highlights/2005-12-20_Kitzmiller_decision.pdf
Google Scholar

Larson, Edward J. 2007. The Creation-Evolution Debate: Historical Perspectives. Athens, GA: University of Georgia Press.
Google Scholar

Lofland, John et al. 2006. Analyzing Social Settings: A Guide to Qualitative Observation and Analysis, 4th ed. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing Company.
Google Scholar

McCaffrey, Dawn and Jennifer Keys. 2000. “Competitive Framing Processes in the Abortion Debate: Polarization-Vilification, Frame Saving, and Frame Debunking.” The Sociological Quarterly 41(1):41-61.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1533-8525.2000.tb02365.x

McCammon, Holly J. 2009. “Beyond Frame Resonance: The Argumentative Structure and Persuasive Capacity of Twentieth-Century U.S. Women’s Jury-Rights Frames.” Mobilization 14(1):45-64.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.17813/maiq.14.1.yr2671812325362v

Numbers, Ronald L. 2006. The Creationists: From Scientific Creationism to Intelligent Design, Expanded Edition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Google Scholar

Pember, Mary Annette. 2007. “Farewell to the Chief.” Diverse Issues in Higher Education 24(4):18-20.
Google Scholar

Perrin, Andrew J. 2005. “National Threat and Political Culture: Authoritarianism, Antiauthoritarianism, and the September 11 Attacks.” Political Psychology 26(2):167-194.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9221.2005.00414.x

Polletta, Francesca. 1998. “‘It was like a Fever …’ Narrative and Identity in Social Protest.” Social Problems 45(2):137-159.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1525/sp.1998.45.2.03x0163g

Rosenstein, Jay. 2001. “In Whose Honor?: Mascots and the Media.” Pp. 241-256 in Team Spirits: The Native American Mascots Controversy, edited by Richard C. King and Charles Fruehling Springwood. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press.
Google Scholar

Scheff, Thomas J. 2005. “The Structure of Context: Deciphering Frame Analysis.” Sociological Theory 23(4):368-385.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0735-2751.2005.00259.x

Silva, Eric O. 2007. “Public Accounts: Defending Contested Practices.” Symbolic Interaction 30(2):245-265.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1525/si.2007.30.2.245

Skocpol, Theda, (ed.). 1984. “Emerging Agendas and Recurrent Strategies in Historical Sociology.” Pp. 356-391 in Vision and Method in Historical Sociology. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511621567.012

Snow, David A. 2004. “Framing Processes, Ideology, and Discursive Fields.” Pp. 380-412 in The Blackwell Companion to Social Movements, edited by David A. Snow, Sarah A. Soule, and Hanspeter Kriesi. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/b.9780631226697.2003.00018.x

Snow, David A. and Robert D. Benford. 1988. “Ideology, Frame Resonance, and Participant Mobilization.” International Social Movement Research 1:197-217.
Google Scholar

Snow, David A. and Robert D. Benford. 1992. “Master Frames and Cycles of Protests.” Pp. 133-155 in Frontiers in Social Movement Theory, edited by Aldon D. Morris and Carol McClurg Mueller. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Google Scholar

Snow, David A. and Sarah A. Soule. 2010. A Primer on Social Movements. New York: W.W. Norton & Company.
Google Scholar

Spindel, Carol. 2002. Dancing at Halftime: Sports and the Controversy over American Indian Mascots. New York: New York University Press.
Google Scholar

Staurowsky, Ellen J. 2004. “Privilege at Play: On the Legal and Social Fictions That Sustain American Indian Sport Imagery.” Journal of Sport and Social Issues 28(1):11-29.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0193-723503261148

Staurowsky, Ellen J. 2007. “‘You Know, We Are All Indian’: Exploring White Power and Privilege in Reactions to the NCAA Native American Mascot Policy.” Journal of Sport and Social Issues 31(1):61-76.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0193723506296825

Steinberg, Marc W. 1999. “The Talk and Back Talk of Collective Action: A Dialogic Analysis of Repertoires of Discourse among Nineteenth-Century English Cotton Spinners.” The American Journal of Sociology 105(3):736-780.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/210359

Thomson, Irene Taviss. 2010. Culture Wars and Enduring American Dilemmas. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.3998/mpub.1571326