Argument as Rational Discourse

1
Argument as Rational Discourse

• To make an argument, you need an issue.
• Issue
• Swine Flu or H1N1
• How is this an issue?

2

• To get to the heart of an issue, you need a
  question
• at issue.
• Question at issue
• Is the media exploiting H1N1 (formerly known as
  Swine Flu)?

3
Form a Question at Issue for the following
Topics

• Global Warming / Climate Change
• Teen Pregnancy
• Gay Marriage
• The Economy
• President Obama
• Technology MySpace / Facebook / Twittering /
  Sexting
• Your Generation
• Drugs
• War on Terrorism
• Prisons
• Illegal Immigration
• Bush Administration
• Torture

4
Relationship of Question at Issue to Claim
(Thesis)

• Question at Issue
• Is the media exploiting H1N1 (formerly known as
  Swine Flu)?
• Your Claim
• The media is exploiting H1N1.
• Or
• The media is not exploiting N1N1
• Or?

5
Employing the Rogerian Strategyfrom Issue to
Strategy

• Carl H. Rogers (1902-1987), best known for his
  book On Becoming a Person, was a psychotherapist,
  not a writer.

6
Rogers When we do not listen, we do not grow.

• To avoid this lack of opportunity for growth, the
  Rogerian Strategy requires participants in
  arguments to become partners, not adversaries.
• Rogers points out when we engage in an argument,
  if we feel that our integrity or our identity is
  threatened, we stiffen our resistance (Stubbs
  66).

7

• Our opponent may have given good reasons, but
  because of his or her aggressive or even
  threatening approach, we may not be open to them.
  Consequently, an opportunity to gain knowledgeto
  growis lost.
• If we view argument as dialogue, an open exchange
  of ideas directed toward mutual understanding, we
  may find a more responsive audience and thus have
  a greater success with changing peoples
  opinions.

8
Manipulation?

• Consider how you respond to people who seem to
  have a well-rounded, informed opinion.
• What happens to their ethos?

9
Empathy is the keyword

• As Rogers suggests, the writer should see the
  expressed idea and attitude from the other
  persons point of view, to sense how it feels to
  him, to achieve his frame of reference in regard
  to the thing he is talking about.

10
How would Carl Rogers break up a bar fight?
11

• Writers generally interested in persuading others
  will educate themselves, by listening and
  reading.
• This is a path to wisdom.

12
By employing the Rogerian Strategy

• one can show sympathetic understanding of the
  opposing argument
• one can recognize what is valid in it
• one can recognize and demonstrate that those who
  take the other side are nonetheless persons of
  goodwill (or at least present themselves this
  way).

13
Therefore, the Rogerian Argument

• is non-confrontational, collegial, and friendly
• respects other views and allows for plural
  truths
• And seeks to achieve some degree of assent
  (agreement) rather than convince utterly.

14
The Rogerian Strategy A Typical Outline

• 1. It usually begins by exploring common ground
  the writer shares with the audiencegains the
  interests from parties on both sides of the
  issue. Think of the basic human values the two
  sides might share. For example, for the issue of
  H1N1, health concerns about a pandemic is good
  common ground.
• 2. May move to some background information/
  history on the issue, like the 1918 Influenza
  Pandemic that killed between 20 and 40 million
  people.

15

• 3. Moves towards an objectively phrased statement
  that defines the issue.
• For example While some people feel as though
  the H1N1 Flu (Swine Flu) should be a major
  concern to all of us, others feel as though it is
  yet another example of our out of control media.
• 4. Presents a Question at Issue.
• For example Is the media exploiting the H1N1
  situation?

16

• 5. Presents a complete and neutrally worded
  analysis of one sides position. You should
  demonstrate that you understand their position
  and their reasons for holding it. You should
  carefully avoid any suggestion that this position
  is more just, more moral, or more sensitive than
  the opposing position.
• 6. Presents a complete and neutrally worded
  analysis of the other sides position. You should
  demonstrate that you understand their position
  and their reasons for holding it. You should
  carefully avoid any suggestion that this position
  is more just, more moral, or more sensitive than
  the opposing positioneven though the second side
  presented is typically the authors position
  (although your position may be a synthesis of the
  two, or something entirely new).

17

• 7. An analysis of what the two positions have in
  common and what goals and values they share. This
  discussion should be more specific than the
  common ground used to engage the two sides (see
  1). Both sides in our example share concern
  about this specific flu pandemic, public health,
  and our ability to receive accurate information
  from the media. What else?

18

• 8. A presentation of your positionyour claim
  (thesis, key assertion, conclusion). You cannot
  be neutral here. This is where you weigh in
  however, remain consistent with the Rogerian
  stylethis is not your time to attack the
  opponent, but rather your time to point out why
  your side will benefit all.
• Your position may align with one of the sides
  presented it may be a synthesis of the two
  sides or it may be an additional side.
  Remember, there are more than two sides to every
  issue. For example While a flu pandemic is
  certainly something we should be prepared for, it
  is important to look at the recent history of the
  media and the corporations behind it to fully
  understand how they benefit from exploiting H1N1.
  Fear is known to

19
Current Issues via Editorial CartoonsIdentify a
Question at Issue
20
(No Transcript)
21
(No Transcript)
22
(No Transcript)
23
(No Transcript)
24
(No Transcript)
25
(No Transcript)
26
(No Transcript)
27
(No Transcript)
28
(No Transcript)
29
(No Transcript)
30
(No Transcript)
31
(No Transcript)
32
(No Transcript)
33
(No Transcript)
34
(No Transcript)
35
(No Transcript)
36
(No Transcript)
37
(No Transcript)
38
(No Transcript)
39
(No Transcript)
40
(No Transcript)
41
(No Transcript)
42
(No Transcript)
43
(No Transcript)
44
(No Transcript)