Even though many people think otherwise, life is not always about success and triumphs. A so-called Rogerian argument is the type of argument that is very different from the traditional meaning of this word. In a Rogerian argument, the focus is on the discussion itself, as well as on the understanding of the points introduced by the opposite side of the argument. Its goal is not for one of the sides to win but to discuss the matters and find the common ground in the dispute. However, it is hard to say whether the principles of the Rogerian argument work in our world.
The authentic Rogerian argument needs to be objective. It also has to ensure that the opponents understand the difference between their opinions and can come to a resolution by embracing them. Both sides of the argument should see their conversation in a different way – not trying to persuade their rival in the rightness of their opinion but to take a look at the matter of the argument from another angle and try to understand their opponent. No one should feel threatened in this kind of argument, because no one’s opinion is misjudged or ridiculed.
Thus, in a perfect world, the Rogerian argument is used in a way that allows both participants of the dispute to understand each other’s points of view. They should also render their opponent’s position as valid and viable. At the end of this kind of argument, a compromise should be offered and a common ground should be found for both sides.
However, since we do not live in a perfect world, everything is happening differently. Let us take an example from the history. The Rogerian argument was very popular in Ancient Greece. It was frequently utilized in a number of public settings, especially when someone wanted to look better in the eyes of their opponent. The same approach is being used today by politicians, but since most people understand their real goals, no one believes their words.
Even though the idea of the Rogerian argument is very good and beneficial for everyone involved in any dispute, it does not work as it was designed to work. In case people in power living in this world were able to hold their disputes using the model of the Rogerian argument, a lot of current issues would be resolved. For instance, those, who stand for and against the death penalty, would be listening to each other more attentively and calmly. The issue of illegal immigration would find better grounds. Besides, such important problems as gun control, Internet freedom restrictions, and use of resources would also find their resolutions that would fit everyone involved. Participants of the argument would work together to understand each other and make the world a better place. However, since it is not happening, it means that we do not understand the nature of the Rogerian argument correctly or fail to use this strategy properly.
You may be interetsed in: