Harris’ ideas of “countering” are just as interesting and valid as his idea of “forwarding”. In this idea, the aim of academic writing must be to add what can be said about a subject. To do this, it may be necessary to identify the weaknesses and limitations of other writings but that should in no way be the sole point of writing. “Counter” is not to nullify but to suggest to someone, a different way of thinking. The basic defining phrases for countering are “On the other hand ...” and “Yes, but…” In Harris’ idea of countering, countering brings a different set of interests to bear upon a subject, to look and notice what others have not. The main aim is not to wholly refute what has been said before, or to bring the discussion to an end, but to respond to prior views in ways that move the conversation in new directions.

In “Hot Air”, the blog that I’m following, one of today’s featured articles was titled “Report: Hasan attended same radical mosque as 9/11 hijackers; Update: “He was a typical fundamentalist Muslim”. This article shows Harris’ idea of countering. While other articles around it talked about how no information was acquired on Hasan and how we may never know if religion was a factor, this article thrust its nose in clearly with some new information that set the argument about religion as a factor for the massacre in a different direction but almost proving that Hassam was a fundamentalist Muslim. It does this somewhat obliquely as what this article counters to remains general and hidden at first sight. However, the article by itself has only added its own viewpoint which incidentally carries along evidence that Hassan was Anti-American. And nothing seems to be lost as it builds of the main stream idea with one of its own.

Click HERE to go to Hot Air