1. Rogerian argument

2. Rogerian Model Emphasizes problem-solving and/or coming to consensus
Named after the psychologist Carl Rogers, who believed that people could only resolve an issue or solve a problem once they found the "common ground."
Emphasizes problem-solving and/or coming to consensus
Allows the author to appear open-minded or even objective
Best when you need to convince a hostile audience to at least respect your views
May rely heavily on ethos and pathos

3. What’s the major difference between rogerian and toulmin?
Because it focuses on building bridges between writer and audience, and places considerable weight on the values, beliefs, and opinions the two share, a Rogerian argument doesn’t emphasize an "I win–you lose" outcome as much as classical or Toulmin arguments do.

4. Outline of rogerian argument
There are six elements:
Introduction
Summary of Opposing Views
Statement of Understanding
Statement of Your Position
Statement of Contexts
Statement of Benefits

5. Component 1: Introduction
State problem to be solved or question to be answered
Focus on how this is a problem for everyone
Explore common ground author shares with audience

6. Component 2: Summary of Opposing Views
Summarize opponent’s viewpoint as accurately and objectively as possible
This shows that you can listen without judgment and that you understand all sides (establishes ethos)

7. Component 3: Statement of Understanding
Explain which parts of the opponent’s viewpoint with which you agree
Explain conditions under which the opponent is right

8. Component 4: Statement of Your Position
State your position and reasons for believing this
Avoid language that is loaded, attacks the audience, or suggests your view is morally superior

9. Component 5: Statement of Contexts
Describe the context under which your position works
Recognize that your opponent may not agree with you all the time, but by showing the merit of your claim under specific circumstances, the audience should be able to find common ground

10. Component 6: Statement of Benefits
Show how your position benefits your audience
Appeal to your audience’s self-interest
Show the concessions you have made and invite your audience to make concessions as well
Close your argument on a hopeful note, where both sides win

11. Rogerian Arguments: example
1. Introduction: Should students wear uniforms? 2. Summary of opposing views: Some argue YES as uniforms create a sense of equality and highlight the person, not the materials they wear. Others say NO because uniforms limit self expression and individuality. 3. Statement of Understanding: I understand the point of view that uniforms, in making students look the ‘same’, may also make them feel they are all ‘the same’, unable to express their personal style and individuality. 4. Statement of Your Position: However, I think the above belief is mistaken, because – in reality – it should not be the materials we wear that define who we are, but rather our actions, our words, our talents. With this in mind, I believe uniforms are a quality addition to any school policy. 5. Statement of Contexts: If your shoes are Nike brand, that does not tell me your are a talented athlete, merely that you or your parents have the money to purchase Brand names. If you wear purple, that does not tell me you are a talented artist, merely that you have a preference for purple. 6. State of Benefits: Meanwhile, in a uniform, brand names do not exist, and economic status is no longer a barrier. In a uniform, rather than your clothes speaking for you, you speak for yourself. In a uniform, you must prove – to the world and yourself – that you are a talented athlete, or artist, or mathematician. Ironically, by making everyone look ‘the same’, uniforms allow us to TRULY become unique.