Running head: GOD IN THE DETAILS

God In The Details

Ivy J. Rice
BYU-Idaho

GOD IN THE DETAILS

English has always been easy to me. Naturally, when a major was to be declared it was
creative writing, yet over the years the emphasis changed, but the end game was still an English
degree. Then came the moment when a minor was needed and the world of computer
programming like one of those 1980 gremlins would not release me. I had no idea what I would
do with an English degree and a computer minor. I wasnt very tech savvy! I knew the basics of
computer because I grew up with them, but I was no Steve Jobs. Nevertheless, the more I
struggled and endured, I begin to hear the benefits of being an English major and CIT minor. I
begin to hear about more job opportunities. I begin to see how God was way ahead of me: He
saw all the possibilities before me; He was preparing me for my future. Thus, God is always in
the fabric of our lives, guiding us, and inviting us to follow His ways because they are always
better. Both articles emphasize those points.
In her essay, Agonism in the Academy: Surviving Higher Learnings Argument
Culture, (1991/2012) Deborah Tannen, linguistic professor at Georgetown University, argues
that agonism is popular in the academic society. She explains how agonism is a term given by
Walter Ong describing the trained way in which the world argues. In her book The Argument
Culture Tannen explores agonism in politics, law, and journalism; nevertheless, Tannen cannot
help but notice the growing agonism in the (academic) argument culture. She notices that it is
fueled by two assumptions: One, intelligence is demonstrated through a figurative battle, and
two, intelligence is demonstrated through fault finding critique.
In her essay, Needed: Techs Who Know Shakespeare, (1998/2012) Ellen Ullman, an
English graduate at Cornell University, and self-taught computer programmer, argues that at one
time computer programmers were needed; however, today computer programmers who know the
world are needed more. Ullman explores historically how computer programming became in

GOD IN THE DETAILS

demand, and how she courageously started a new career in computer programming. Ullman
teaches what is needed most in the field of computer programming: An ability to learn, a
teachable and imaginative mind, and understanding of more than just computer textbooks.
Tannens essay explores a positive outlook or higher standard that is needed in the
classroom to the academic field for personal growth. Ullman, additionally, desires more from the
techs of the world. Through analyzing and synthesizing these articles the main points discovered
is the need for society to follow Jesus teachings, gain knowledge, and why everyone should
yield to God.
Both Tannen and Ullmans essays relate to the scholarly knowledge found in academe.
Tannen begins her essay disparaging on a book club discussion that was done by some
individuals who did not even read the actual book, or did not like it. The book club members
were able to critique negatively but not so positively. Its written in two voicesand the voices
dont interrogate each other said one of the members (1991/2012, p. 492).
Nonetheless, the book club discussion was not wasted as it led Tannen to recall a subject
found in her book The Argument Culture based on Walter Ongs idea of agonism, which is
programmed contentiousness (as cited in Tannen, 1991/2012, p.492). Tannen illustrates
agonism as a debate ceremony (p. 492). She believes in the need to change how debates and
discussions are conducted in order for growth and creativity to flourish. Tannen declares and
addresses the two assumptions in argument culture. She says, we train our students, conduct our
classes and our research, and exchange ideas at meetingsdriven by our ideological assumption
that intellectual inquiry is a metaphorical battle (p. 493). The second assumption Tannen adds
is thinking the best way to demonstrate intellectual prowess is to criticize, find fault, and attack

GOD IN THE DETAILS

(p.493). She agrees that agonism is alive in our academic culture and only when we change how
we conduct classes, discussions, et cetera, can we build off of one another.
Furthermore, Ullman also believes that students studying foreign language, literature,
linguistics, philosophy and history of science can improve the technological world (1998/2012,
p.517). Ullman explains in the boom of computer programming none had degrees and they came
from all different backgrounds: anthropology, library science, and most abnormal today, people
who had completed all but their dissertations in linguistics, archeology and classics (p.517).
Ullman shares her discovery of whats missing in technology today, and concludes that
[p]rogrammers seem to be changing the worldthey [should know]something about it (p.
517). Thus, both Tannen and Ullman through their academic expertise can see the creative need
in both professions by learning from each other, through our different experienced backgrounds.
Although, Tannen and Ullman are discussing two different fields, academe and
technology, respectfully, Tannen in considering the usual teaching method in a classroom and
how perceived through the agonism filter, she can see how a students desire to learn and
experience can be stopped in creativity. She calls to action, stating that, [i]f the class engages in
discussion rather than debateadding such intellectual activities as exploring ideascomparing
and contrasting different interpretations of a workmore students take part, and more of them
gain a deeper, and more accurate, understanding of the material. Most importantstudents
learnrespect and open-minded inquiry (1991/2012, p. 493).
Additionally, Ullman teaches how learning specific skills in the classroom is pointless
since it will all soon be obsolete in the technological field. Ullman stresses that it is important
to know how the world is run. Moreover, the need to be open minded, flexible, and creative are
points that Tannen and Ullman can agree on. Even so, knowing how to communicate with others

GOD IN THE DETAILS

is an important social skill in our world. Yet, how to debate well with claim and reasons,
evidence and warrants, is not significant. Learning from each other is the key. And wouldnt it be
best if there was more than one technological geek? Someone who knew a foreign language or
mathematics because one thing Tannen and Ullman can agree on is an open mind and
creativity. Technology, Ullman instructs, was built on that.
Besides, students at Brigham Young University-Idaho are taught to teach one another
(BYU-Idaho Learning Model, 2013, para. 2). By practicing this learning model, students are able
to build each other up, a skill Tannen identifies that is missing in class discourse. Moreover,
practice in group dynamics, in giving and receiving positive feedback, leads to the growth in
creativity flow that is not seen in the academic world. There is always, as Tannen describes in
The Argument Culture, agonism, as a debate of ritualized opposition in every field (as cited
in Tannen, 1991/2012, p. 493). If only the world could not practice agonism, instead apply the
teachings of Jesus, and then society would gain more out of technological and academic
discoveries.
In the Holy Bible, Jesus teaches the reader to love one another. Yet, that is not what is
taught in any competitive field. Tannen shares literary critic, Jane Tompkins agnostic revelation
on the figurative battlefield of academe argument, which Tompkins calls a ritual execution of
some sort (as cited in Tannen, 1991/2012, p. 494). Tompkins only came to this conclusion years
after comparing how she originally attacked the work of another researcher. The Lord, in latterday revelation, says to cease to find fault one with another (Doctrine & Covenants 88:124).
That is a commandment, when applied correctly, Tannen would agree will broaden the
academias creative growth.

GOD IN THE DETAILS

Furthermore, Ullman teaches, although she lacks a degree in computer programming, she
and her fellow co-workers did know one thing: how to learn (1998/2012, p. 517). According to
Doctrine and Covenants the Lord has commanded the world to obtain a knowledge of history,
and of countries, and of kingdoms, of laws of God and man (93:53). Ullman explains that
[p]rospective programmers spent a great deal of time in school, but they typically studied
something other than computers (p. 517). Therefore, non-computer degrees answers a higher
law, as students spend the rest of their time studying foreign language, literature, linguistics,
philosophy and history of science which is just as important according God (p. 517).
As we build up each other as Tannen teaches, and keep an open mind as Ullman instructs,
we follow the learning model and profit by learning from others, not stopping the creative
growth of another person, loving them as Jesus would, discovering together the many things
there are to learn about the world. Therefore, the learner can ultimately yield to God, who is
omniscient, who sees all that has happened and will happen, and who wants the world to be
prepared because He loves us.
It was years ago, my first winter in Rexburg, Idaho, when I struggled to accept my future
in the world of zeros and ones. Yet now, as I see the finish line in sight, still unsure about the
outcome, but with more understanding of the importance of trusting God, that He knows best,
that in order to really stretch my mind and rely on Him is not always easy. Yet, I need a way to
survive a more and more unstable world, to always be learning in an often mutable field, to be
innovative in the tumultuous and tenuous future. Nevertheless, the Lord in His infinite wisdom
knew that truth long before I did: English and computers can go together, and any other field.

GOD IN THE DETAILS

Overall, The Lord is in the fabric of our lives, inviting us to love our neighbor as
ourselves, learn from them, as they learn from us, thus profiting from our association and
benefiting our families and, ultimately, the world.

GOD IN THE DETAILS

8
References

Brigham Young University-Idaho (2013). BYU-Idaho Learning Model. Retrieved from

http://www.byui.edu/about/defining-aspects/learning-model
Tannen, D. (1991/2012). Agonism In The Academy: Surviving Higher Learnings Argument
Culture. In R. Seamons (Ed.), The way of wisdom (pp. 492-495). Rexburg, ID: BYUIdaho. Retrieved from http://ilearn.byui.edu
Ullman, E. (1998/2012). Needed: Techies Who Know Shakespeare. In R. Seamons (Ed.), The
way of wisdom (pp. 516-517). Rexburg, ID: BYU-Idaho. Retrieved from
http://ilearn.byui.edu