Rogerian Argumentation

Rogerian Argumentation addresses some of the main misconceptions about arguments: that they are confrontational, oppressive, and center around at least two competitive, incompatible perspectives.

On the contrary. Rogerian Argumentation is centered around principles of mutual understanding, sympathy, and corroboration. Its purpose is to find a common ground between the two parties: a balance where both sides of the issue can come to an agreement. It is a much more amicable way to discuss differences.

Rogerian Arguments follow a four-step process designed to both ingratiate yourself to opposition and to help you better understand and sympathize with them:

• Address the issue. It's important to identify that there is an issue – not that you have an issue or someone else has an issue but that an issue exists. While being careful not to take sides, you should address the issue by taking a serious look at the situation from a neutral perspective and address what both sides can agree on.
• Identify positives and negatives of the opposition. You aren’t trying to bring down your opposition: you are trying to show your understanding. This way, you present yourself as concerned about the issue and sympathetic to their concerns without tearing down their entire argument. Sometimes, we can feel inclined to point out every fallacy and short-coming, but rarely are things so simple and convenient. Instead of tearing down, build them up, and show you are sympathetic to your opposition.
• Identify positives and negatives of your own stance. Rather than lift your own stance on the issue as a paradigm, you should own up to its shortcomings: making your own stance seem ideal can be just as off-putting as tearing down an opposing side. Instead of championing your own stance, approach your stance as if you were a third-party. Be objective and be honest.
• Compromise. Having established that you understand and are sympathetic to both sides of the issue, it is time to work out a compromise: propose a plan that employs the strengths and positive aspects of both sides, while simultaneously minimizing the weaknesses and negative aspects. By suggesting a compromise, you recognize your opposition has a voice in the matter, and you disagree with but still respect, as opposed to disregarding all different opinions.

Analyzing both sides of an issue can help us understand the complexities of a problem and others' perspectives. It’s all too easy to limit our own perspectives, rather than consider the opinions or concerns of others, or even take a serious look at the problem itself, but we can mire ourselves with our preoccupations and prejudices. Rogerian Argumentation gives us a way to reevaluate just how we see and deal with problems or topics.

By way of disclaimer, I want to add, while the principles behind Rogerian Argumentation can be be applied to any situation, compromise is not always an option. One side may not be willing to concede to a compromise, or a mutually beneficial option simply is not feasible. 

However, no matter what the situation, take time to explore, understand, and in particular, articulate the positions of your opposition.