Don’t hate on your audience. Rogerian Argument Don’t hate on your audience.

Argument v. Persuasion Definitions tend to be “academic” Some say argument is purely logical, and persuasion contains emotional appeals. ARGUMENT = discover a truth or conviction PERSUASION = seeks to change a point of view or ACT on a conviction

Argumention Three models of argumentation Classical Toulmin Rogerian

Aristotelian (Classical) argument Seeks to REFUTE the opposition because they are WRONG! Audience/opponent is WRONG, and must be “disproved” or overwhelmed by evidence. Again, don’t worry about labels. Know concepts.

You don’t pick fights with your audience! The  Rogerian  model  acknowledges  the  audience’s view  or  opinions  before  presenting  the  author’s    opposing  viewpoint .    A  Rogerian argument  supports  the  central  argument  with  tact without attacking the audience’s point of view.

Rogerian Argument Seeks to establish trust and find COMMON GROUND. The prompt on many of the AP argument essays will ask you to DEFEND REFUTE QUALIFY

Courtroom Example: When you would NOT use Rogerian techniques… Prosecution and defense argue with EACH OTHER - but the AUDIENCE is really the Judge and jury. In this case, there is no need to be nice or concede ANY points to the opposition. Your goal is to WIN!!

Same thing with DEBATES: The OPPONENT is not the AUDIENCE, so you might not see many Rogerian techniques when you watch debates! The goal is to WIN or Dominate!

Things that happen in a Rogerian Argument Speaker/writer shows (sympathetic) understanding to the opposition. Speaker/writer demonstrates that those who disagree with them are still reasonable, intelligent people of good will (not fools and idiots). Speaker/writer is non- confrontational, even friendly (not “my way or the highway”).

Structure of the Rogerian argument Introduction: statement of problem to be solved or question to be answered Summary of Opposing Views: described using a seemingly objective persona Statement of Understanding: concedes circumstances under which opposing views might be valid Statement of Your Position Statement of Contexts: describes contexts in which your position applies/works well Statement of Benefits: appeals to self-interest of readers who may not yet agree with you; demonstrates how your position benefits them

Rogerian Model Thesis Begin with the subordinated clause Although Then present the argument in the main clause. Although states with cell phone bans have a lower incidence of accidents caused by driver distraction, laws restricting cell phone usage must be rescinded as they are an infringement of personal privacy and a violation of First Amendment rights.

To Review… State the problem or issue. Give the opposing position. Grant some validity to parts of it. Recognize circumstances where it could be acceptable. State YOUR position, support it, and tell why the opposition will be IMPROVED by embracing your views. Why will the world be a better place for this?