The Rogerian model of argument is based on the theories of psychotherapist Carl Rogers. While debate is aimed at winning against the opposition as judged by a neutral and disinterested third party (Barnet and Bedau 299), Rogerian argument is aimed at persuading the opposition through a mutual effort "toward solving a problem rather than toward attacking a person or group" (Rogers qtd. in Barnet and Bedau 300). The emphasis of the Rogerian approach is on communication rather than on winning the argument. Thsi is accomplished via a non-threatening examination of "shared concerns" and "common goals" (Hairston 50). "Threat inhibits communication. When a person feels threatened by what another person is saying, he or she is apt to stop listening in order to reduce anxiety and protect the ego" (Hairston 50-1). "The closer the subject of argument comes to the beliefs that constitute the core of a person's sense of self, of identity, the more any attempt to change [those] beliefs is perceived as a threat and met with walls of defence (sic)" (Brent, par. 7). Rogerian argument aims at "neutral language [which] decreases threat and increases communication" (Hairston 51).
In the Rogerian approach, research is more than just the recording of facts and judgements or the accumulation of evidence. Instead, research becomes a process of exploring multiple ways of looking at the same problem and evaluating each non-judgementally, with the goal of understanding, not only the conclusions reached, but the thinking processes and viewpoints that led to those conclusions, and, from that understanding, identifying the best possible solution to the problem (Brent, pars. 20-4). A key component, then, or Rogerian argument is that it recognizes and affirms the strengths, values, and merits of the opposition (Barnet and Bedau 300)
A Rogerian argument usually takes the following form:
- An introduction to the problem and a demonstration that the opponent's position is understood.
- A statement of the contexts in which the opponent's position may be valid.
- A statement of the writer's position, including the contexts in which it is valid.
- A statement of how the opponent's position would benefit if he [or she] were to adopt elements of the writer's position. If the writer can show that the positions complement each other, that each supplies what the other lacks, so much the better.
The Rogerian model is not an attempt to manipulate the opposition into accepting the writer's own position (Brent, pars. 45-8). The Rogerian approach is only effective when the writer has conscientiously and fairly weighed and evaluated all of the evidence from all relevant points of view and then proposed the best solution to the problem, whether that solution is an amalgamation of all or several of the proposed approaches or is the single most effective approach to solving the problem. The goal of Rogerian rhetoric is to identify genuine grounds of shared understanding, not just as a precursor to an "effective" argument, but as a means of engaging in effective [problem-solving] (Brent, par. 49).