Ad blocker interference detected!
Wikia is a free-to-use site that makes money from advertising. We have a modified experience for viewers using ad blockers
Wikia is not accessible if you’ve made further modifications. Remove the custom ad blocker rule(s) and the page will load as expected.
Individual differences |
Methods | Statistics | Clinical | Educational | Industrial | Professional items | World psychology |
American psychologist Carl R. Rogers propagated his "principles of communications," a form of discussion based on finding common ground. He proposed trying to understand our adversary's position, by listening to him, before adopting a point of view without considering those factors.
This form of reasoning is the opposite of Aristotelian argumentation -using logos, ethos, and pathos-, which is an adversarial form of debate (enthymeme) because it attempts to find compromise between two sides.
Young, Becker and Pike identified four stages:
- An introduction to the problem and a demonstration that the opponent's position is understood.
- A statement of the contexts in which the opponent's position may be valid.
- A statement of the writer's position, including the contexts in which it is valid.
- A statement of how the opponent's position would benefit if he were to adopt elements of the writer's position. If the writer can show that the positions complement each other, that each supplies what the other lacks, so much the better.
In practice this type of argument is mostly used in written discourse.[How to reference and link to summary or text]
Over the years a number of criticisms have been voiced. Such as
- It can be construed as manipulative.
- Rogerian rhetoric is too idealistic to be used in day-to-day life; people are too hostile.
- As it privileges co-operative construction of meaning over goal-directed persuasion as well as the building of relationships over the winning of an argument, it appears to fit neatly into the feminist perspective. Yet Rogerian rhetoric feels "feminine rather than feminist."
- ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 Just Shut Up and Listen to Your Enemy - Whatever Happened to Rogerian Argument? By KAZ DZIAMKA, Counterpunch, May 16, 2007
- ↑ 2.0 2.1 2.2 What is Rogerian Argument? by Kate Kiefer, Colorado State University
- ↑ Outline of Rogerian argument Empire State College
- ↑ 4.0 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 Rogerian Rhetoric: An Alternative to Traditional Rhetoric Douglas Brent, University of Calgary