thesis statement for rogerian argument

Purdue Online Writing Lab College of Liberal Arts

Rogerian Argument

Welcome to the Purdue OWL

This page is brought to you by the OWL at Purdue University. When printing this page, you must include the entire legal notice.

Copyright ©1995-2018 by The Writing Lab & The OWL at Purdue and Purdue University. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, reproduced, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed without permission. Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our terms and conditions of fair use.

The Rogerian argument (or Rogerian rhetoric) is a form of argumentative reasoning that aims to establish a middle ground between parties with opposing viewpoints or goals. Developed by psychotherapist Carl Rogers and adapted to rhetoric by writing scholars Young, Becker, and Pike, the speaker seeks compromise, acknowledging positive aspects of each party’s argument to arrive at a mutually-beneficial solution to an issue. 

You may already use Rogerian argument in your everyday life to negotiate with your friends, family, and/or romantic partners. For example, if you wanted to watch a comedy and your friend wanted to watch a romance, you might compromise by offering to watch a rom-com, as this offers each of you a bit of what you are looking for in that particular moment. Note, however, that this style of argument is decidedly less common in academic settings, where various empirical or theoretical notions of truth are often prized above the practical advantages of the Rogerian method.

While Aristotelian styles of argument are often seen as eristic (concerned primarily with winning), the Rogerian argument can be viewed as more dialectic in nature (a conversation between two or more parties with the goal of arriving at some mutually-satisfying solution). Thus, practicing the Rogerian argument will enhance your ability to understand the complex relations of opposing viewpoints and provide tools for addressing such discrepancies sympathetically. It’s also great for day-to-day conflict resolution at home or in the workplace.

However, Rogerian argument does come with disadvantages. For example, because Rogerian argument relies on compromise between opposing parties, it may not work well when your opponents are unwilling or unable to compromise, or if they are arguing in bad faith (e.g., they care only about winning). It may also lead to sub-optimal solutions if your opponent’s position is demonstrably wrong, since in this case you may nevertheless be forced to sacrifice some of your (ostensibly superior) goals order to accommodate your opponent’s (inferior) ones.

In “Rhetoric: Discovery and Change” (1970), Young, Becker, and Pike describe the primary aims of the Rogerian argument as follows:

• to convey to the reader that he is understood,
• to delineate the area within which he believes the reader's position to be valid, and
• to induce him to believe that he and the writer share similar moral qualities (honesty, integrity, and good will) and aspirations (the desire to discover a mutually acceptable solution).

The first aim shows the reader that you understand the complexities of the argument and that you have listened sympathetically to what it is they have to say. This is important, because the success of the Rogerian arguments relies on cooperation and collaboration. The second aim puts this understanding into practice by seeking a symbiotic solution. The third aim builds ethos and rapport between the parties. If audiences believe they share a value system with a speaker or writer, they are more likely to agree to the terms of whatever solution is presented.

While each of these aims is important, Young, Becker, and Pike stress that they are just that: aims, not steps. You should not necessarily view these aims as occurring in a linear, step-by-step process. The authors present a synthesized discussion of what a successful Rogerian argument should contain, but they eschew any formalized structure. The structure of the argument should instead be determined by the speaker, and it should be modified and adapted according to the rhetorical situation at hand.

Again, there is no formalized structure for the Rogerian argument, though the following example provides a foundation   for considering how you might structure your own argument.

A successful Rogerian argument will likely include the following:

• Introduction (addressing the topic to be discussed and/or the problem to be solved)
• Opposing position (showing that you understand your opposition’s viewpoints/goals)
• Context for opposing position (showing that you understand the situations in which their viewpoint is valid)
• Your position (introducing/addressing your viewpoint as it differs from the reader’s)
• Context for your position (objectively showing the reader the context(s) under which your position is valid)
• Benefits (appeal to the opposition by showing how they would benefit by adopting elements of your position)

Below, we’ve provided an example Rogerian argument that follows the formula above. In this example, we will take the position that technology (e.g., laptops and tablets) should be allowed in writing classes while also considering the opinion of the opposition, who argue that such technology is more of a distraction than   a helpful tool. In so doing, we should be able to arrive at a solution that considers both arguments and develops a solution that benefits both parties while still achieving our goal of allowing technology in the classroom.

Introduction

Here, we would introduce the topic and briefly discuss why it is a matter of contention. We would lay out the differing perspectives, briefly mention the merits of each argument, and discuss the implications closely considering all perspectives to arrive at a solution that works for everyone.

Opposing position

Here, we would introduce the opposing position that digital technology should not be allowed in the writing classroom. We would also list and discuss their objections to the proposition of technology in the classroom. These might include the notions that it’s distracting for the individual, the class, and the instructor, and is often used to avoid the lesson and instead play games or go on social media.

Context for opposing position

Here we might provide specific details that lend merit to their argument. We want to show that we are fully considering their claims and not just giving lip service, in the hope that that they will give similar value to our opinions. We could include statistics, testimony from instructors and students, or even examples from media that support their theory that digital technology can indeed be a distraction during instruction.

Your Position

Here, we would introduce our claim that digital technology should be allowed in the writing classroom. We would still want to speak as objectively as possible in order to establish our ethos as concerned but unbiased speaker. We might even qualify our position by acknowledging that there are, of course, situations in which technology should be put away, but reiterate that, generally speaking, the presence of digital technology is a positive.

Context for your position

Here, we can provide examples that run contrary to the ones we used for the context of our opposition’s position. For example, we could gather testimony from students who claim that using these technologies in class has been beneficial. We could include research and scholarship that supports our position and even quote instructors who have developed pedagogy around these technologies. We might even subtly demonstrate that our opposition has failed to account for all possibilities by choosing our examples carefully. For instance, we could easily include accounts of students with learning disabilities who might otherwise have a difficult time succeeding in class without the help of assistive technologies.

Here, we would use the points we’ve established throughout the argument to appeal to our opposition and find some productive middle ground that benefits both parties. We would acknowledge that some instructors do not want digital technologies present in the classroom, as they believe they distract from paying attention during lectures. We would maintain, however, that these technologies can indeed be productive tools for learning—in some cases, they can even be a virtual requirement for learning. We could then offer a solution: that these digital technologies should be kept aside during lecture portions of a lesson except in the case of students with documented disabilities. This way, students will likely be paying attention, taking notes by hand which they can transcribe later if they so wish. However, once a class moves from lecture to activity (whether group or individual), students should be allowed to access these technologies to more effectively engage with the activity, organize their thoughts, and access information. Now that the instructor is no longer lecturing, it should be easier to monitor student progress and engagement and the use of technology for these activities will lead to more developed and better organized results from the students.

• Order Tracking

Writing a Thesis Statement for a Rogerian Argument

• Writing a Thesis Statement for…

Table of Contents

What is a Rogerian Argument?

We often find speakers and authors getting involved or facing a kind of aggression and challenge defending their point of view amongst people who disagree with them. When some one is offended and his intellect or beliefs are challenged, his ego gets bruised and he only tries to prove himself right without considering the facts or arguments presented by the opponent. In that case no one actually pays attention to the gravity of the issue rather the focus of debate is dislocated.

Rogerian arguments come as a rescue to avoid such situations. The Rogerian argument is based on the fact that the findings of the opponent (or readers) are equally reputable and so the writer acknowledges them and finds a common ground, between him and his readers, related to the issue.

This encourages the reader to read on in an essay . Then the writer develops his argument taking the reader along and this helps in finding a better solution to the problem instead of originating bad taste and distrust. This style of arguing is based on Carl Roger’s work on psychology.

Essential Tips for Writing a Thesis Statement with the Method of Rogerian Argument

Where in an essay is the rogerian statement written.

The thesis statement for a Rogerian argument does not come in the beginning like a typical essay. Instead in the introduction the writer writes about something that he and his audience share regarding the topic.

Then in the following paragraphs or the body the writer explains and advocates the audience’s point of view and states how their argument is valid. After doing so in a few paragraphs he states what his position on the issue is within the same circumstances and mentions how it differs from that of audience’s.

Language and Conveyance

The language should be neutral and clear. The reader should not feel deceived so the good will should prevail. Here is where the thesis statement comes in. But the statement should not be completely different. It should be an original thought but should also have some connection with the reader’s point of view.

The reader should feel that this is yet another aspect of a popular belief but is slightly different. Then the writer should explain how the consequences can vary if his position is adopted also keeping in mind what the reader believes in. It should reveal itself like something that was there but just not visible.

Conclusion of a Rogerian Argument

A Rogerian argument is concluded by offering possible solutions and ways leading to compromises that could keep both points of views in balance. The reader is not asked to give up his argument rather he is intrigued to think about writer’s position positively and take the conclusion offered as an assistance to face the challenge in various scenarios.

Rogerian arguments are beneficial in solving emotionally charged issues. The writer can only succeed if he understands readers’ position and presents their analysis honestly and clearly.

Author:  Tracy Parker

Related posts.

• High School
• You don't have any recent items yet.
• You don't have any courses yet.
• You don't have any books yet.
• You don't have any Studylists yet.
• Information

Ethical Rogerian Argument Thesis Outline Assignment Instructions

Composition and rhetoric (engl 101), liberty university, recommended for you, students also viewed.

• Functionality - Notes taken
• Mauserhscv - Notes taken
• Early War Production - Notes taken
• Transitional Production
• Late War Production - Notes taken
• Presentation Pistols - Notes taken

Related documents

• Covert action is - Notes taken
• ENGL101 Notes
• Anti-Homeless Architecture
• Rhetorical Self Paper Guide
• Mid-term for engl 101
• ENGL 101 WEEK Three PT 1 - Class lecture notes, examples, classwork

Preview text

Ethical rogerian argument thesis/outline assignment.

INSTRUCTIONS

In Module 4: Week 4, you must develop a thesis statement and outline for the 1000-1200 word ethical argument essay that you will write in Module 5: Week 5. This assignment will show your understanding of the reading material covered so far in the course related to argument and essay development. Putting in the time to do the groundwork in the thesis/outline assignment will help you when you begin writing the actual essay in Module 5: Week 5. It is important to review the sample student outline available in APA, MLA, and Turabian in chapter 14 to understand the expectations of this assignment that will be somewhat different from the expectations of the thesis/outline assignments for the other essay assignments in this course.

Review chapter 14 in the textbook for the sample ethical Rogerian argument thesis/outline written in the documentation style for your major course of study. Using the sample, complete your own thesis/outline in Module 4: Week 4 that you will use in Module 5: Week 5 to develop your Ethical Rogerian Argument Essay Assignment. Your thesis/outline assignment should include a clear thesis statement that addresses the question in the prompt with a clear ethical argument and an outline of your plan of support following the Rogerian Model of argument. The research sources for this essay have been provided as Learn items in Module 4: Week 4. Any additional sources that you may choose to use must be credible academic sources. You may include biblical support, but your biblical support does not count in the required citations.

 Prompt: How far should humans go to protect the environment?  Complete your thesis/outline using the sample in chapter 14 as a model while addressing the prompt question.  Document your sources correctly according to your documentation style (Current APA, MLA, or Turabian).  Integrate a total of at least 4 quotations, 1 summary, and 1 paraphrase (6 total) from at least 3 credible academic sources

Helpful Hints

 Chapter 14 in Module 4: Week 4 includes sample student outlines for an ethical (Rogerian) thesis/outline in each of the documentation styles (APA, MLA, and Turabian).  Chapter 4 in Module 4: Week 4 includes a general outline for the Rogerian Model of argument.  Review the Minimum Outline Requirements Checklist (below) to understand the content that you must include in your thesis/outline assignment.  Review the Ethical Rogerian Argument Thesis/Outline Assignment Grading Rubric in the course before submitting your thesis/outline assignment.

Page 1 of 2

Minimum Outline Requirements Successful Needs Revision

Thesis statement: Clearly states your debatable argument relative to an ethical principle

Evidence: Presents points that support the thesis based on the principle (In your outline, include at least the minimum number of required paraphrases, summaries, and/or quotes from outside sources as indicated in assignment instructions.)

Opposing argument(s): Presents viewpoints opposing your thesis argument giving special consideration to opposition of the ethical principle along with discussion of common ground as required by Rogerian argument. (Including the strongest opposition to refute helps build your credibility and convinces your audience to consider or adopt your position.)

Organize your information into the correct outline format. (See examples for APA, MLA, and Turabian in Chapter 14 for the Rogerian Model of argument.)

Documentation Requirements for Outline (Include minimum number of sources required for this assignment.):

If using current APA format, include properly formatted parenthetical intext citations and a References page.

If using current MLA format, include properly formatted parenthetical intext citations and a Works Cited page.

If using current Turabian format, include properly formatted footnotes and Bibliography page.

When you are satisfied with the quality of your thesis/outline, submit it for grading. Include your degree program and whether you are using current MLA, APA, or Turabian in the document’s title when submitting your thesis/outline.

Page 2 of 2

• Multiple Choice

Course : Composition and Rhetoric (ENGL 101)

University : liberty university, this is a preview.

Access to all documents

Get Unlimited Downloads

Improve your grades

Get 30 days of free Premium

Share your documents to unlock

Why is this page out of focus?

Rogerian style essay

In order to better understand and effectively utilize the Rogerian argument approach, it is important to explore various perspectives and insights on the topic. The following articles provide valuable information and tips on how to employ the Rogerian argument method in discussions and debates.

When it comes to writing a Rogerian style essay, it is important to approach the topic with a sense of empathy and understanding for differing viewpoints. This unique style of argumentation focuses on finding common ground with the opposition in order to reach a compromise or solution. To help you craft a successful Rogerian essay, here are three articles that provide valuable insights and tips on how to effectively utilize this approach:

Building Bridges: How to Use Rogerian Argumentation in Your Essays

"Building Bridges: How to Use Rogerian Argumentation in Your Essays" is a comprehensive guide that provides valuable insights into incorporating Rogerian argumentation into your writing. Written in a clear and accessible style, this book is a must-have for anyone looking to enhance their persuasive writing skills.

One of the key strengths of this book is its practical approach. The author breaks down the Rogerian argumentation technique into easy-to-follow steps, making it simple for readers to understand and implement in their own essays. By emphasizing the importance of finding common ground with your audience, the book teaches writers how to build bridges between differing perspectives, ultimately leading to more effective and convincing arguments.

In addition to its practical guidance, the book also offers numerous examples and exercises to help readers practice and master the art of Rogerian argumentation. These hands-on activities provide valuable opportunities for writers to hone their skills and gain confidence in using this powerful technique.

Overall, "Building Bridges: How to Use Rogerian Argumentation in Your Essays" is a valuable resource for writers of all levels. Whether you're a student looking to improve your academic writing or a professional seeking to enhance your persuasive communication skills, this book offers practical advice and guidance that will help you succeed in your writing endeavors.

Key Points:

The Art of Persuasion: Mastering the Rogerian Style

"The Art of Persuasion: Mastering the Rogerian Style" is a comprehensive guide that delves into the Rogerian approach to persuasion, a method that emphasizes empathy, understanding, and mutual respect. This book is a must-read for anyone looking to enhance their persuasive skills and communicate effectively in various contexts.

One of the key strengths of this book is its clear and concise explanations of the Rogerian style of persuasion. The author breaks down complex concepts into easily digestible chunks, making it accessible to readers of all levels of expertise. Additionally, the book provides practical tips and strategies for implementing the Rogerian approach in real-life situations, helping readers apply their newfound knowledge in a meaningful way.

Moreover, "The Art of Persuasion: Mastering the Rogerian Style" includes numerous real-world examples and case studies that illustrate the effectiveness of the Rogerian approach. These examples serve to reinforce the principles discussed in the book and offer valuable insights into how to apply them in practice.

Overall, this book is a valuable resource for anyone looking to improve their persuasive abilities and enhance their communication skills. Whether you are a student, professional, or someone simply looking to better navigate interpersonal relationships, "The Art of Persuasion: Mastering the Rogerian Style" is sure to provide you

Finding Common Ground: Tips for Writing a Successful Rogerian Essay

When it comes to writing a Rogerian essay, finding common ground is essential. This type of essay aims to foster mutual understanding and find a middle ground between opposing viewpoints. To achieve this, there are several tips that can help you successfully write a Rogerian essay.

First and foremost, it is important to approach the topic with an open mind. Be willing to listen to the opposing viewpoint without judgment. This will help you find areas of agreement and build a foundation for constructive dialogue. Additionally, it is crucial to do thorough research on the topic to understand both sides of the argument.

In your essay, focus on presenting the opposing viewpoint in a fair and objective manner. Avoid using inflammatory language or making personal attacks. Instead, strive to create a respectful and empathetic tone that encourages cooperation and understanding.

Another key tip for writing a successful Rogerian essay is to clearly outline the areas of agreement between the opposing viewpoints. By highlighting common ground, you can bridge the gap between the two sides and create a sense of unity.

Overall, mastering the art of finding common ground in a Rogerian essay requires patience, empathy, and effective communication. By following these tips, you can create a well-crafted essay that promotes understanding and collaboration.

• Humanities ›
• English Grammar ›

Rogerian Argument: Definition and Examples

• An Introduction to Punctuation
• Ph.D., Rhetoric and English, University of Georgia
• M.A., Modern English and American Literature, University of Leicester
• B.A., English, State University of New York

Rogerian argument is a negotiating strategy in which common goals are identified and opposing views are described as objectively as possible in an effort to establish common ground and reach an agreement. It is also known as  Rogerian rhetoric , Rogerian argumentation , Rogerian persuasion , and empathic listening .

Whereas traditional argument focuses on winning , the Rogerian model seeks a mutually satisfactory solution.

The Rogerian model of argument was adapted from the work of American psychologist Carl Rogers by the composition scholars Richard Young, Alton Becker, and Kenneth Pike in their textbook "Rhetoric: Discovery and Change" (1970).

Aims of Rogerian Argument

The authors of "Rhetoric: Discovery and Change" explain the process this way:

"The writer who uses the Rogerian strategy attempts to do three things: (1) to convey to the reader that he is understood, (2) to delineate the area within which he believes the reader's position to be valid, and (3) to induce him to believe that he and the writer share similar moral qualities (honesty, integrity, and good will) and aspirations (the desire to discover a mutually acceptable solution). We stress here that these are only tasks, not stages of the argument. Rogerian argument has no conventional structure; in fact, users of the strategy deliberately avoid conventional persuasive structures and techniques because these devices tend to produce a sense of threat, precisely what the writer seeks to overcome....

"The goal of Rogerian argument is to create a situation conducive to cooperation; this may well involve changes in Format of Rogerian Argument.

When presenting your case and the case of the other side, the style is flexible with how you set up your information and how long you spend on each section. But you do want to be balanced—spending an inordinate amount of time on your position and only giving lip service to the other side, for example, defeats the purpose of using the Rogerian style. The ideal format of a written Rogerian persuasion looks something like this (Richard M. Coe, "Form and Substance: An Advanced Rhetoric." Wiley, 1981):

• Introduction : Present the topic as a problem to solve together, rather than an issue.
• Opposing position : State the opinion of your opposition in an objective manner that's fair and accurate, so the "other side" knows that you understand its position.
• Context for the opposing position : Show the opposition that you understand under what circumstances its position is valid .
• Your position : Present your position objectively. Yes, you want to be convincing, but you want the opposition to see it with clarity and fairly as well, just as you presented its position earlier.
• Context for your position : Show the opposition contexts in which your position is also valid.
• Benefits : Appeal to the opposition and show how elements of your position could work to benefit its interests.

You use one type of rhetoric when discussing your position with people who already agree with you. To discuss your position with the opposition, you need to tone that down and break it into objective elements, so the sides can more easily see areas of common ground. Taking the time to state the opposing side's arguments and contexts means the opposition has less reason to get defensive and stop listening to your ideas.

Feminist Responses to Rogerian Argument

In the 1970s and into the early 1990s, some debate existed about whether women should use this conflict-solving technique.

"Feminists are divided on the method: some see Rogerian argument as feminist and beneficial because it appears less antagonistic than traditional Aristotelian argument. Others argue that when used by women, this type of argument reinforces the 'feminine' stereotype, since historically women are viewed as nonconfrontational and understanding (see especially Catherine E. Lamb's 1991 article 'Beyond Argument in Freshman Composition' and Phyllis Lassner's 1990 article 'Feminist Responses to Rogerian Argument')." (Edith H. Babin and Kimberly Harrison, "Contemporary Composition Studies: A Guide to Theorists and Terms." Greenwood, 1999)

• What Does Argumentation Mean?
• paralogism (rhetoric and logic)
• Socratic Dialogue (Argumentation)
• Definition and Examples of Evidence in Argument
• Stipulative Definitions in English
• expeditio (elimination)
• Logos (Rhetoric)
• What Does It Mean to Make a Claim During an Argument?
• Concession Used in Rhetoric
• Definition and Examples of Praeteritio (Preteritio) in Rhetoric
• Exordium - Definition and Examples
• What Is a Red Herring?
• Amplification Definition and Examples in Rhetoric
• Confirmation in Speech and Rhetoric
• Definition and Examples of Dialectic in Rhetoric