Rogerian Argument Analysis

Some of the greatest stars in the NBA were drafted straight out of high school. Lebron James, Kobe Bryant, and Dwight Howard are just a few examples. Even though, as of 2006, the NBA eligibility rule states that a player entering the NBA draft must be at least nineteen years old and a year removed from high school, it is still a huge debate in the sports world of whether or not this rule is the right choice. Before the rule was set in place, NBA commissioner David Stern said, “We have the right to set an age limit in the collective bargaining agreement. I believe we can work together to come up with something that is legally correct and will

E.g. God is seen as a desirable explanation for motion and cause. Individually, these arguments have been criticised, but F.R Tennant has argued that the arguments have a cumulative effect - together they form a

1. Examine the strengths and weaknesses of the argument for the existence of God based on religious experience. (18) 2. ‘The argument merely indicates the probability of God and this is of little value to a religious believer.’ Discuss. (12)

In Kelly James Clark’s Article “Without Evidence or Argument”, Clark argues that belief in God, does not require the support of evidence or argument in order for it to be rational. Clark’s argument is against W.K. Clifford’s article “The Ethics of Belief”, in which Clifford claims that everything must be believed only on the basis of sufficient evidence (139). Throughout Kelly Clark’s article he states many things that support his conclusion of belief without evidence or argument, however, my paper will only discuss what Clark says on p.139 starting with the paragraph “The first problem with Clifford’s…” and the following paragraph, ending with the words “...to see why.”

The Rogerian method is a method for an argument which is put in to a negotiating way. This argument is about whether or not it is racist to use American Indian names for a university. The author presents both sides of the argument, showing how this problem can be seen through the American Indians and the fans of the university. This was an effective argument overall and the author goes in depth on both sides.

Anne Fadiman, uses a Rogerian approach as her argumentation style in her book called The Spirit Catches You and You Fall Down. A Rogerian argumentation style is a conflict-solving technique that works towards finding a common ground. For example, in the beginning of her book, Fadiman states:

The primary goal of the Rogerian Argument is to give the reader an opportunity to form his or her opinion based on the facts that will be presented. In the paper Helmets: Life or Liberty the author discussing how helmets were once viewed as nerdy appearance or being uncomfortable until people start to notice the adverse side effects. In the introduction paragraph, the author just talks about why the sport is so likable. The author didn't have basic facts on snowboarding and snow skiing. The author stated why people love playing the game because "give a unique sense of freedom and satisfaction that is unlike any other sport can offer" (Snow Boarder pg.1). In the Rogerian Argument, you want the thesis statement to be a question so the reader can pick a side to choose from.

By definition, “Argument is an activity, often pleasurable and productive, that engages us at high levels of inquiry and critical thinking” (Ramage 2). Although, in my opinion, argument can be defined as a disagreement between two people with opposing views and or beliefs on a given issue.

Graff and Birkenstein argue in chapter 14 that instead of asking, "What is the author trying to say?" ask students to provoke discussions by asking questions such as "What is motivating the writer's arugment?" in order to better approach reading. Because of this, discussions tended to be "far livelier" and helped students identify a response to an argument. When we are not able to find what the writer is responding to, we have to infer with clues the writer provides in their text. This is important because usually a writer assumes that a reader is familiar with what they are trying to say. So when we try to figure out what is motivating these writers, we have to ask ourselves if the author is responding to an argument. Doing this can help us

In his article “The Range of Justice (or, How to Retrieve Liberal Sectual Tolerance)” Gerald Gaus states that human reason is what leads to the continued disagreement and the development of parties (or sects) to support the different ways of thinking. He claims that because the use of reasoning leads to such controversy that we should learn to apply the

Besides BonJour's argument of illustrative examples, moderate rationalism is defended by two intimately related dialectical arguments. The argument is that the denial of a priori justification will lead to a severe skepticism, in which only the most direct experience could be justified. Stemming from this severe skepticism, comes the stronger argument that argumentation itself becomes impossible. This essay will describe the distinct segments of the argument and will demonstrate the relationship between the two arguments.

Since the 19th century, William Clifford and William James have been the foremost religious theorist and have attempted to answer significant creation and theological mysteries. However, Clifford and James have varying views on the belief debate, each formulating a rational argument of what the basis for belief should be. Clifford’s, Ethics of Belief and James’ The Will to Believe outline their respective arguments which are vastly similar and but have marked differences. Both articles will be examined for these similarities and difference and stated within this paper.

I ‘m in full agreement. This is an issue in our church. It seems like at least two Sunday’s a month I get into a conversation with someone who is a minority about insensitive comments made, feeling marginalized, etc. Sometimes, it’s with someone who is not a minority. Most of the time they ignore the comment and don’t address it with the person because they don’t want to come across as the angry (fill-in the blank) person. Most enjoy attending Chelten but are debating about leaving because they don’t feel part of the Chelten family/community. I will state it this way – I think minorities feel like renters and not homeowners because they feel they are not allowed to “buy” a home in the community of Chelten.

Religion, whether we realize it or not, is a major element of American society (and also worldwide history). For many, religion is a significant part of their cultural identity. Religion plays a part in all levels of politics and is often an aspect of community events and organizations. Everyday, we all interact with people who have different religious backgrounds and personal beliefs. Children born into religious families are very connected with their religions from birth and this affects the way they will see the world for the rest of their lives. Even those who later explore other faiths or convert to other religious ideas will be affected in

This section provides us with two selections from the essays of William K. Clifford (1845-1879) and William James (1842-1910). Clifford's essay, The Ethics of Belief, is based on the concept of evidentialism. This concept 'holds that we should not accept any statement as true unless we have good evidence to support its truth'; (Voices of Wisdom, 346). James wrote his essay, The Will to Believe, as a response to Clifford's essay where he endorsed a philosophy called pragmatism.