traditional vs Rogerian argument
Terms in this set (6)
Traditional Argument: Writer states the claim and gives reasons to prove it. Writer refutes the opponent by showing what is wrong or invalid.
Rogerian Argument: The writer states opponent's claim to demonstrate understanding and shows how its valid.
Traditional Argument: Writer establishes own character by demonstrating fair-mindedness, competence, and good will.
Rogerian Argument: Writer builds opponent's ethos and enhances own character through empathy.
Traditional Argument: Writer appeals to reason to establish a claim and refute the opponent's claim.
Rogerian Argument: Writer proceeds in an explanatory fashion to analyze the conditions under which the position of either side is valid.
Traditional Argument: Writer arouses emotion with evocative language to strengthen the claim.
Rogerian Argument: Writer uses descriptive, dispassionate language to cool emotions on both sides.
Traditional Argument: Writer seeks to change opponent's mind and thereby win the argument.
Rogerian Argument: The writer creates cooperation, the possibility that both sides might change, and a mutually advantageous outcome.
Use of argument techniques
Traditional Argument: Writer draws on conventional structures and techniques, such as the Tolumin Model of Argument, using claims of fact, definition, cause, value, and policy, and by showing different kinds of proofs.
Rogerian Argument: Writer throws out conventional structures and techniques because they might be threatening and focuses instead on connecting empathetically.