Rogerian Rhetoric

Summary/Response

Rogerian Rhetoric is a type of argument that is based off the idea's of a therapist named Carl Rogers. When Rogers discovered that he couldn't rationalize with his patients when he told them what was best he decided to take the approach of allowing them to heal themselves. Rogers would try and reiterate the patients frustrations and problems in his own words, and when the patient felt understood Rogers would steer them into a new way of thinking. The rhetoric works the same way; you propose a topic, usually an emotional one, and present first with the oppositions point of view. Then you summarize and empathize to gain support from the opposition. Then you turn around and steer towards the point of view you were trying to get across all along.
I think this is a very good idea in theory. If you assume to understand what the opposition is thinking though, and completely miss the mark you may come off as foolish. I also think that empathizing when you don't really agree with the point of view can come off as condescending. I think the Rogerian way of therapy is condescending and leads you to assume too much about others problems and frustrations. So over all, the Rogerian rhetoric may be useful, but I do not prefer it.