Rogerian Argument—To BUILD BRIDGES (Professor Ellen Shull, Fall 2017)

Threat in typical arguments aims to assault egos and stifle listening. (“I’m right and you’re wrong!”)

Didactic argumentation (preaching) and making strong statements causes the opposing side to do the same. Both sides then are only interested in defending their own turf.

Strong language, biased language, and emotional language expand the assault and build tall, strong walls between the two sides. NO BRIDGES HERE

On the other hand, to create bridges of understanding—

Neutral language reduces threat and allows for listening.

Neutral language creates an atmosphere of listening.

Intimidation is replaced by trust, critical thinking, and group thinking.

Cooperative thinking builds bridges towards solutions that both sides can agree upon.

————————————————————————————

Plan for Rogerian Argumentation

Before Writing

Conduct the research on your chosen topic by finding 5 or more sources. You cannot create an effective argument without plenty of specific information.

Go to the Library Database, and under Social Science you will find the topic “Opposing Viewpoints” that presents many arguments for and against interesting subjects. You may find all that you need at that site. [Abortion and capital punishment are not to be chosen.]

Follow these rules for the Writing:

Introduction: introduces the subject but does not take a side.

Works Cited: information from sources must be documented on a Works Cited page.

Signal Phrases & In-Text Citations: will introduce cited information in the essay itself with the documentation following. See pages 116 to 119 and 124 to 133 in the handbook.

Quotations: follow “When to Use Quotations” on page 114 of the handbook.

For every source used in the argument, you must have a listing in the Works Cited.

Length: 800 to 1000 words (3 to 4 pages) with in-text citations and a Works Cited page naming all resources.

Use subtitles in italics for each part: Introduction, Neutral Analysis of One Side, Neutral Analysis of the Opposing Side, Common Ground, Proposed Solution.

Hairston, Maxine. A Contemporary Rhetoric, 3rd ed. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1982.

Tannen, Deborah. The Argument Culture: Moving from Debate to Dialogue. New York: Random House, 1998.

Teich, Nathaniel. Rogerian Perspectives. New York: Ablex, 1992.

Parts of the Rogerian Argument

1. The Introduction

2. Neutral analysis of one side

3. Neutral analysis of the opposing side

4. Common Ground—What both sides have in common

5. Solution: Proposal to resolve the issue that both sides would agree with

Introduction

|

|

|

|

|

Neutral Analysis Neutral Analysis

One Side of the Argument— — — — — — Other Side of the Argument

|

|

Common Ground—What

Both Sides Have in Common

|

|

Solution: Proposal to resolve

the Issue that Both Sides

Might Agree with

the purpose is to find a solution, not to win an argument.