你們不是站在我們這一邊，就是站在敵人那一邊
在政治傳播中，「你們不是站在我們這一邊，就是站在敵人那一邊」及其變種術語被用來暗示不參與術語使用者所倡導的黨派努力的後果是被視為敵人。一個當代例子是前美國總統喬治·沃克·布什在啟動反恐戰爭時所發表的聲明：「每個地區的每個國家現在都要作出抉擇。你們不是站在我們這一邊，就是站在恐怖主義分子那一邊。」[1]
這種表述通常是用於描述發言者信念的描述性陳述，陳述的是一種基本假設而非邏輯結論，並也可以解釋為一種言語行為。相關表述有時也被解釋為一種非黑即白思維或假兩難推理這一非形式謬誤。
有些人認為這種表述是一種勸說他人在不允許中立立場的衝突中選擇立場的方式[2]。只有在沒有中庸之道等其他選擇時，這種表述才具有邏輯結論的有效性。[3]
參見
[編輯]參考文獻
[編輯]- ^ Bush: 'You Are Either With Us, Or With the Terrorists' – 2001-09-21, Voice of America via Internet Archive - archived URL at VOA News （頁面存檔備份，存於網際網路檔案館）
- ^ Orwell, George. George Orwell: The Collected Essays, Journalism & Letters Volume 2 – My Country left or right. 1968: 226.
- ^ Schiappa, Edward. Warranting Assent: Case Studies in Argument Evaluation. State University of New York. 1995: 25. ISBN 0-7914-2363-8.
延伸閱讀
[編輯]- Ajami, Fouad. "With Us or Against Us," New York Times Book Review 156.53817 (1/7/2007): 14–15.
- Bethune, Brian. "Are You With Us or Against Us?" in Maclean's 119.45 (13 November 2006): 21.
- "For us, or against us?" in Economist 376.8444 (17 September 2005): 44.
- Seymour, Richard. "With us or against us—Iran talks tough," Middle East 364 (Feb 2006): 18–19.
- Singh, Anita Inder. "With Us or Against Us," World Today 61.8/9 (Aug/Sep 2005): 25.
- "With us or against us," Economist 385.8555 (17 November 2007): 42.
- "You're Either With Us or Against Us," Maclean's 121.6 (3/10/2008): 23–29.
- Bially Mattern, Janice. "Why Soft Power Isn't So Soft: Representational Force and the Sociolinguistic Construction of Attraction in World Politics." Millennium-Journal of International Studies 33, no. 3 (2005): 583–612.