Causal and Necessitative Argumentation in the Quran: A Rhetorical Study of Constructing Psychological Balance

Abstract

This study investigates two key argumentative relations in Quranic discourse—causal and necessitative argumentation—through a rhetorical–pragmatic lens that highlights their role in fostering psychological balance in the recipient. Adopting a pragmatic argumentative approach, the research tracks the mechanisms of linkage and patterns of semantic transition within these relations, and offers applied examples that demonstrate the systematic organization of argumentative structures in selected verses. It further explores how examining these relations can enrich our understanding of concepts connected to psychological equilibrium, and underscores the methodological value that a rhetorical–pragmatic perspective adds to the analysis of Quranic discourse. The study is structured into an introduction, a preface, two main sections, and a conclusion: the preface discusses argumentation in the Quran and its potential for building inner balance, while the first section analyzes causal argumentation and the second addresses necessitative argumentation. The findings reveal that these two relations do not merely perform abstract linguistic functions, but act as rhetorical mechanisms that guide inferential pathways in the text and shape the recipient’s cognition and emotion, thereby enhancing the Quran’s capacity to harmonize intellectual and affective needs.