Qur’ānic Persuasive Logic as a Structural Framework: Exploring Syllogism and Presupposition in Divine Argumentation

Abstract

This study examines Qur’ānic persuasive logic as a structural framework, emphasizing how the text employs syllogistic and presuppositional reasoning in divine argumentation. Although the Qur’ān does not use formal Aristotelian logic, its rhetorical discourse reveals implicit logical patterns that invite rational reflection. Drawing on classical Islamic thought, particularly that of al-Ghazālī, this research employs thematic analysis to examine selected narratives. It identifies three core syllogistic structures with their corresponding epistemic presuppositions: equilibrium (taʿādul), equivalence (talāzum), and contradiction (taʿāruḍ). These elements are integral to theological persuasion, guiding readers from accepted premises toward coherent and compelling religious conclusions. The findings confirm that the Qur’ān systematically employs both syllogism and presupposition—not merely as stylistic devices but as core logical instruments in its persuasive strategy. These elements work in tandem to shape a coherent argumentative structure that affirms divine truth while appealing to human reason. Particularly in the narratives of Ibrāhīm and Mūsā, the presence of deductive and analogical reasoning grounded in presupposed truths is both evident and methodologically consistent. This research thus contributes to Qur’ānic studies by foregrounding a model of divine persuasion rooted in logical architecture, where syllogism and presupposition function as integral components of the Qur’ān’s epistemic and rhetorical authority.