Rogerian vs Toulmin
Structure in an argument defines which parts go where. Traditionally, logical arguments have been described using either inductive or deductive structure. There is a lot more to arguments than just that. There are three different ways to help structure arguments. The most used structure in an argumentative essay is the Classical Oration (Lunsford & Ruszkiewicz, 2010, p. 172). It is the simplest way to write an argumentative essay. The more complex and less often used ways to structure an argument is the Rogerian and Toulmin argument style. The Rogerian is an understand and acknowledge the audience type of argument, whereas the Toulmin is more of an evidence to support the facts of what is being argued type of argument. Toulmin is a better more effective structure when writing an argumentative essay. In a Rogerian argument, the opposition is an important key role. In order to properly use the Rogerian argument you must genuinely consider the opposite (176). The introduction begins with the writer describing an issue. The description is deep enough to show that the writer fully understands and respects any alternative position. The writer then describes the contexts that the opposing position may be legitimate. After, the writer states his or her position on the issue and presents a situation where that opinion would be valid. The writer goes on to explain how the opposing position would benefit from adopting his or her position. The key to Rogerian argumentation is a willingness to think about opposing positions and to describe them equally. Rogerian uses more pathos than actual facts, making it the less useful way to structure an argumentative essay. Toulmin argumentation uses syllogisms such as "sometimes, often, presumable, unless, almost. etc." Although this method seems useless ,it has become a powerful and practical tool for understanding and shaping arguments (182). First, the writer begins with a claim generally it is a statement about what is being