| Summary: | Appealing to emotions - and specifically, appealing to pity - is a persuasive strategy that is at work in private discussions as well as, more massively, in the defense of certain causes, including humanitarian ones. Appealing to pity is however sometimes pointed out as problematic, and when it is disqualified, one has to resort to alternative argumentative strategies. In this paper, we give a quick overview of the appeal to pity, considered first from a rhetorical perspective, then from an argumentative perspective. We identify some of the criticisms addressed to such a rhetorical strategy. Then, based on an illustrative corpus, gathered via Internet research using the phrase "not for pity" on the one hand, and via an examination of the campaigns launched by humanitarian organizations on the other hand, we identify several alternative argumentative strategies (mainly, the appeal to solidarity and the argument of self-interest). We show how they seek to thwart the criticisms addressed to the appeal to pity. We conclude by considering the denunciation of "assistantship" [assistanat] that pervades many contemporary discourses in the public space in France. We consider that such a discursive motive conveys a criticism of rhetoric aimed at justifying altruistic action.
|
|---|
