A Rogerian argument is conducted according to special principles which will be discussed in the present guide. Its main idea is the assumption that each person has to understand the point of view of their opponent. From the very beginning both opponents have to attempt at mutual understanding, but at the same time they should not give up their own point of view completely for then the argument would not work effectively; this would be a mere resignation.
It is important to read also articles which defend the opposite point of view; in your case, arguing for paid tertiary education. Do not forget that you are writing a Rogerian essay, but not a .
Essay Tips: How to Write a Rogerian Argument
King, R. (2003). Don’t kill in our names: Families of murder victims speak out against the death
penalty. New Brunswick, N.J: Rutgers University Press.
Finkelstein, C. (January 01, 2006). A CONTRACTARIAN ARGUMENT AGAINST THE
DEATH PENALTY. New York University Law Review, 81, 4, 1283.
Argument persuasive essay abortion
Objectivity is another key component to Rogerian argument, encouraging both sides to embrace the differences that have prevented a resolution. The goal here is for both sides to see the argument under a different light; a different angle, so people are able to see things again for the first time. It is almost reminiscent of coercion, but without the potential of force by threat. A more accurate term for this type of persuasion would be “intentional distraction”.
How can the answer be improved?
Unfortunately, it doesn’t typically work as designed and is about as useful as the United Nations. So, what is the best way to celebrate the impact, or lack thereof, of the Rogerian approach to arguing? Fresh ways to show how ineffective it is, of course. In the spirit of finding more questions than answers, here are a few ideas to further question the validity of Rogerian arguments.
How to Write a Rogerian Essay - Essay Writing - Kibin Blog
According to the principles of formal logic, it is not possible that two contradicting points of view are true; lets say, that The wall is white and The wall is not white. Therefore, the leading principle of such a debate is the idea that only one of the opponents represents the correct point of view. It is important to remark that the Aristotelian understanding of formal logic does not exclude the possibility that a given thesis is logically correct and false at the same time. Formal logic is interested only in the way in which the argumentation is carried out, without any reference to the truth. This is a serious disadvantage in comparison with the Rogerian argumentation.
Rogerian Argument - Excelsior College OWL
A Rogerian essay also does not have anything common with the argument from the opposite (reductio ad absurdum). This is such an inference in which the veracity of the opponents view is assumed and then it is proved that the view in question does not correspond to the facts (or do not lead to proper examination of the issue concerned). Reductio ad absurdum is a traditional logical inference.