I didn’t mind reading the handout on Rogerian Rhetoric, it was in fact relatively interesting. When you think about arguments in the long and the short of things, developing multiple perspective and explaning them is a really good way to win an argument, ofcourse, your argument would have to be explained the best i suppose, but i guess it it all in the eye of the beholder as well. I guess the only question that i have about rogerian rhetoric is how do you make a case for an idea that can be shot down immeadiately? Is there another mechanism that helps build your argument besides, or, in addition to rogerian rhetoric?