The Rogerian argument, inspired by the influential psychologist Carl Rogers, aims to find compromise or common ground about an issue. If, as stated in the beginning of the chapter, academic or rhetorical argument is not merely a two-sided debate that seeks a winner and a loser, the Rogerian argument model provides a structured way to move beyond the win-lose blogger.com: Liza Long, Amy Minervini, Joel Gladd Background: The Rogerian Argument is a persuasive strategy based on collaboration and mutual understanding that seeks common ground, the point at which two sides can agree, rather than victory Rogerian Argument. The Rogerian argument (or Rogerian rhetoric) is a form of argumentative reasoning that aims to establish a middle ground between parties with opposing viewpoints or goals. Developed by psychotherapist Carl Rogers and adapted to rhetoric by writing scholars Young, Becker, and Pike, the speaker seeks compromise, acknowledging
Rogerian Argument: Definition and Examples
The Rogerian argument, inspired by the influential psychologist Carl Rogers, aims to find compromise or common ground about an issue. If, as stated in the beginning of the chapter, academic or rhetorical argument is not merely a two-sided debate that seeks a winner and a loser, the Rogerian argument model provides a structured way to move beyond the win-lose mindset.
Indeed, the Rogerian model can be employed to deal effectively with controversial arguments that have been reduced to two opposing points of view by forcing the writer to confront opposing ideas and then work towards a common understanding with those who might disagree. Introduction : Introduce the issue under scrutiny in a non-confrontational way. Be sure rogerian model of argument outline the main sides in the debate, rogerian model of argument. Though there are always more than two sides to a debate, Rogerian arguments put two in stark opposition to one another.
Rogerian model of argument, be sure to indicate the overall purpose of the essay: to come to a compromise about the issue at hand. If this intent is not stated up front, the reader may be confused or even suspect manipulation on the part of the writer, i.
Be advised that the Rogerian essay uses an inductive reasoning structure, rogerian model of argument, so do not include your thesis in your introduction. You will build toward the thesis and then include it in your conclusion. Once again, state the intent to compromise, but do not yet state what the compromise is. Side A : Carefully map out the main claim and reasoning for the opposing side of the argument first.
Furthermore, you invite the reader to then give you the same respect and consideration when presenting your own view. Finally, presenting the opposition first can help those readers who would side against you to ease into the essay, keeping them invested in the project. If you present your own ideas first, you risk polarizing those readers from the start, which would then make them less amenable to considering a compromise by the end of the essay. Side B : Carefully go over your side of the argument.
In other words, make sure not to raise entirely new categories of support, or there can be no way to come to a compromise. Make sure to maintain a non-confrontational tone; for example, avoid appearing arrogant, sarcastic, or smug, rogerian model of argument. The Bridge rogerian model of argument A solid Rogerian argument acknowledges the desires of each side and tries to accommodate both, rogerian model of argument.
In this rogerian model of argument, point out the ways in which you agree or can find common ground between the two sides. There should be at least one point of agreement. This phase of the essay is crucial for two reasons: finding common ground 1 shows the audience the two views are not necessarily at complete odds, that they share more than they seem, and 2 sets up the compromise to come, making it easier to digest for all parties.
Thus, this section builds a bridge from the two initial isolated and opposite views to a compromise that both sides can reasonably support. The Compromise : Now is the time to finally announce your compromise, which is your thesis.
The compromise is what the essay has been building towards all along, so explain it carefully and demonstrate the logic of it. That shared value can then lead to a new claim, one that disarms the original dispute or set of disputes.
For the racial profiling example, perhaps a better solution would focus on more objective measures than race that would then promote safety in a less problematic way. Find a controversial topic, and begin building a Rogerian argument. Write up your responses to the following:. Write What Matters by Liza Long; Amy Minervini; and Joel Gladd is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.
Skip to content Rogerian Argument The Rogerian argument, inspired by the influential psychologist Carl Rogers, aims to find compromise or common ground about an issue. CC-BY 2. Previous: Aristotelian Classical Argument Model. Rogerian model of argument Toulmin Argument Model. License Write What Matters by Liza Long; Amy Minervini; and Joel Gladd is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4. Share This Book Share on Twitter.
Rogerian and Toulmin Argument
, time: 9:40Rogerian Argument // Purdue Writing Lab
The Rogerian argument, inspired by the influential psychologist Carl Rogers, aims to find compromise or common ground about an issue. If, as stated in the beginning of the chapter, academic or rhetorical argument is not merely a two-sided debate that seeks a winner and a loser, the Rogerian argument model provides a structured way to move beyond the win-lose blogger.com: Liza Long, Amy Minervini, Joel Gladd Background: The Rogerian Argument is a persuasive strategy based on collaboration and mutual understanding that seeks common ground, the point at which two sides can agree, rather than victory Rogerian Argument. The Rogerian argument (or Rogerian rhetoric) is a form of argumentative reasoning that aims to establish a middle ground between parties with opposing viewpoints or goals. Developed by psychotherapist Carl Rogers and adapted to rhetoric by writing scholars Young, Becker, and Pike, the speaker seeks compromise, acknowledging
No comments:
Post a Comment