Greene, whom sees argument as conversation, explains how just an issue and situation can catalyze an argument through a social process. Whether it be defending a falsely accused friend or trying to persuade your teacher for the higher grade, our lives are actual full of informal ‘arguments’. Greene also describes writing in the academic setting as an “inquiry in which you convey your understanding of the claims people make.” I think this is an important point being brought up because these scholarly arguments may not be the real  conversations we have in person. Building an idea off of someone else’s may just be the easiest way to write, for it’s easier to conform to a person of higher intellectual degree. It is easy to lose your “authentic” voice when you have so many viewpoints-that don’t reflect that of your original- spearing the susceptibility of your mind.

Another point that Greene makes is that we generally base our arguments off of the ongoing problems that currently exist, therefore our arguments are extremely situationally oriented. That is why we need to determine ‘the issue’ with regards to ‘the situation’ because issues change with the situation. For example, arguing about college expectations in two culturally varying schools will be completely different because different points will be mentioned based on the time and place where it is discussed. For example, if one were to argue about college expectations in Asia, there will be more values that circulate around higher performance in test scores, while arguing about the same topic in US schools will be based on having a balance socially, and academically.