2. Rogerian Model
Developed by psychologist Carl Rogers
(also in the ’50s)
Emphasizes problem-solving and/or coming
to consensus
Unlike in Classical argument, is not an
argument to win; instead, emphasizes a
“win-win” solution benefiting both parties
Useful in psychological and emotional
arguments, where pathos and ethos
dominate.
3. Benefits of Rogerian Argument
Allows the author to appear openminded or even objective
Appropriate in contexts where you
need to convince a resistant
opponent to at least respect your
views
4. Rogerian Arguments:Structure
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
5. An Example of Rogerian Argument:
Noah S. "Soggy" Sweat, Jr.’s “Whiskey
Speech”
Persona: Author/Speaker was a legislator,
lawyer, and judge
Known as Judge “Soggy” Sweat; “Soggy”
was short for “Sorghum Top” = the tassel
at the top of a sugar cane plant
Occasion/Context: Debate in Mississippi
Legislature in 1948 regarding the possible
legalization of liquor
6. Sweat’s Speech, continued
My friends, I had not intended to
discuss this controversial subject
at this particular time. However, I
want you to know that I do not
shun controversy. On the
contrary, I will take a stand on any
issue at any time, regardless of
how fraught with controversy it
might be. You have asked me how
I feel about whiskey. All right,
here is how I feel about whiskey.
7. Sweat’s Speech, continued
If when you say whiskey, you mean the
devil's brew, the poison scourge, the
bloody monster that defiles innocence,
dethrones reason, destroys the home,
creates misery and poverty, yea,
literally takes the bread from the
mouths of little children; if you mean
the evil drink that topples the Christian
man and woman from the pinnacle of
righteous, gracious living into the
bottomless pit of degradation and
despair and shame and helplessness
and hopelessness --- then I am
certainly against it.
8. Sweat’s Speech, continued
But if, when you say whiskey, you mean
the oil of conversation, the philosophic
wine, the ale that is consumed when good
fellows get together, that puts a song in
their hearts and laughter on their lips and
the warm glow of contentment in their
eyes; if you mean Christmas cheer; if you
mean the stimulating drink that puts the
spring in the old gentleman's step on a
frosty, crispy morning; if you mean the
drink which enables a man to magnify his
joy and his happiness and to forget, if only
for a little while, life's great tragedies and
heartaches and sorrows;
9. Sweat’s Speech, continued
if you mean that drink the sale of which
pours into our treasuries untold
millions of dollars which are used to
provide tender care for our little
crippled children, our blind, our deaf,
our pitiful aged and infirm, to build
highways and hospitals and schools,
then I certainly am for it.
This is my stand, and I will not
compromise.
10. Your challenge…
Keep the first and last paragraph of
Sweat’s speech essentially the
same, changing the issue from
whiskey to whatever you want.
Construct a Rogerian argument
around this issue.
