Location

University of Windsor

Document Type

Paper

Start Date

18-5-2016 9:00 AM

End Date

21-5-2016 5:00 PM

Abstract

This paper analyzes Hasan Nassrallah’s strategic use of retrospective/post-hoc arguments not only as means to justify and legitimize already taken actions, during the Israeli war on Lebanon in 2006, but also as a defense mechanism to rebut oppositions’ counter-claim (that his actions were not the right ones to do because of their negative consequences). Following Fairclough and Fairclough’s (2012) suggestion that to justify past actions arguers develop their arguments in relation to counter-arguments, I propose a structure for retrospective argument whose function is to show that the positive consequences of the already taken action (A) outweigh both the negative consequences of doing (A) and the negative consequences of not doing (A). Eventually, legitimizing the doing of (A). Retrospective critique in this paper will aim to demarcate the legitimating function of appealing to moral values and religious obligations that all Lebanese are expected to cherish.

References

Fairclough, I. & Fairclough, N. (2012). Political discourse analysis: A method for advanced Students. London: Routledge.

Creative Commons License

Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Share

COinS
 
May 18th, 9:00 AM May 21st, 5:00 PM

Legitimizing Past Actions through Appeals to Moral Values

University of Windsor

This paper analyzes Hasan Nassrallah’s strategic use of retrospective/post-hoc arguments not only as means to justify and legitimize already taken actions, during the Israeli war on Lebanon in 2006, but also as a defense mechanism to rebut oppositions’ counter-claim (that his actions were not the right ones to do because of their negative consequences). Following Fairclough and Fairclough’s (2012) suggestion that to justify past actions arguers develop their arguments in relation to counter-arguments, I propose a structure for retrospective argument whose function is to show that the positive consequences of the already taken action (A) outweigh both the negative consequences of doing (A) and the negative consequences of not doing (A). Eventually, legitimizing the doing of (A). Retrospective critique in this paper will aim to demarcate the legitimating function of appealing to moral values and religious obligations that all Lebanese are expected to cherish.

References

Fairclough, I. & Fairclough, N. (2012). Political discourse analysis: A method for advanced Students. London: Routledge.