Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Rogerian argument is an application of Rogers' ideas about communication, taught by rhetoric teachers who were inspired by Rapoport, [6] [7] but Rogers' ideas about communication have also been applied somewhat differently by many others: for example, Marshall Rosenberg created nonviolent communication, a process of conflict resolution and ...
Two men argue at a political protest in New York City. Example of an early argument map, from Richard Whately's Elements of Logic (1852 edition). Argumentation theory is the interdisciplinary study of how conclusions can be supported or undermined by premises through logical reasoning.
Person-centered therapy (PCT), also known as person-centered psychotherapy, person-centered counseling, client-centered therapy and Rogerian psychotherapy, is a form of psychotherapy developed by psychologist Carl Rogers and colleagues beginning in the 1940s [1] and extending into the 1980s. [2]
An argument by example (also known as argument from example) is an argument in which a claim is supported by providing examples. Most conclusions drawn in surveys and carefully controlled experiments are arguments by example and generalization.
Rogerian may refer to: Rogerian argument, a conflict solving technique; Rogerian psychotherapy, one of the major school groups of person-centered psychotherapy
Thomas Gordon (March 11, 1918 – August 26, 2002) was an American clinical psychologist and colleague of Carl Rogers.He is widely recognized as a pioneer in teaching communication skills and conflict resolution methods to parents, teachers, leaders, women, youth and salespeople.
Like appeals to the real, arguments that establish the structure of reality can be divided into two categories: arguments from example or model, and arguments by analogy. The former rely on generalizations derived from a single situation, in the case of example, or on the conformation of a single situation to an accepted practice or ethos , in ...
The Toulmin model assumes that an argument starts with a fact or claim and ends with a conclusion, but ignores an argument's underlying questions. In the example "Harry was born in Bermuda, so Harry must be a British subject", the question "Is Harry a British subject?"