Writing Rogerian Arguments

Rogerian arguments are typically used to address issues that are open to compromise. By making it clear that you understand and respect the opinions of others, you avoid an “I win / you lose” situation and demonstrate empathy and respect for all points of view. In this sense, Rogerian arguments are more like negotiations than classical arguments. Thus, in a Rogerian argument, you spend a good deal of time defining the common ground that exists between you and those with whom you disagree. Ideally, you demonstrate that it is possible to reach a consensus, one that represents the common ground that exists between opposing sides. The more successful you are in accomplishing this goal, the more persuasive your argument will be. Of course with some issues—usually the most polarizing—a consensus is difficult or even impossible to achieve. In these cases, the best you can hope for is to convince people to agree on just one or two points. With other issues, however, you will be able to demonstrate to readers how they would benefit by moving toward your position.

NOTE

Although the Rogerian approach to argument can be used to develop a whole essay, it can also be part of a more traditional argument. In this case, it frequently appears in the refutation section, where opposing arguments are addressed.

196

In general, a Rogerian argument can be structured in the following way:

INTRODUCTION Introduces the problem, pointing out how both the writer and reader are affected (establishes common ground)
BODY Presents the reader’s view of the problem
Presents the writer’s view of the problem (includes evidence to support the writer’s viewpoint)
Shows how the reader would benefit from moving toward the writer’s position (includes evidence to support the writer’s viewpoint)
Lays out possible compromises that would benefit both reader and writer (includes evidence to support the writer’s viewpoint)
CONCLUSION Strong concluding statement reinforces the thesis and emphasizes compromise