You will find essentially two kinds of argument: Aristotelian, or adversarial, and Rogerian, or consensus-building. Aristotelian argument (in line with the teachings from the Greek philosopher Aristotle) is built to confirm a situation or hypothesis in order to refute a current argument. While using techniques at hands, the author tries to persuade the readers to particular perspective. The author uses logic, attracts the rational within the audience, and offers empirical and easy evidence to influence the crowd people to alter their values, attitudes, and actions.
Rogerian argument (according to American psychiatrist Carl Rogersâ€™s studies in psychiatric therapy) is a little differentâ€”its goal would be to develop consensus among visitors instead of establish an adversarial relationship. The concept is the fact that a effective argument is really a winning situation for everybody. Staying away from all psychologically sensitive language, the author phrases claims in as neutral a means as you possibly can to prevent offending visitors by reducing threat and creating trust. The research into the oppositionâ€™s perspective is carefully and fairly phrased, showing the author knows the positioning and causes of thinking it. When preparing for that conclusion, the author highlights the most popular qualities, goals, and values from the arguments and persons involved. Finally, the author proposes an answer that recognizes the interests of your customers.
- Aristotelian argument, or adversarial argument, is built to confirm a situation or hypothesis in order to refute a current argument.
- Rogerian argument, or consensus-building argument, aims to build up commonality among visitors instead of establish an adversarial relationship.