Dissociation of Concepts, Which Works in Presenting Value Premises in Practical Argumentation : In the Case of Asakawa Kan’ichi’s Crises of Japan

This study examines the presentation of value premises in practical argumentation— argumentation aimed at reaching a decision on action—through a discourse analysis of Asakawa Kan’ichi’s Crises of Japan (1909). This work served as a warning against Japan’s imperialistic policy being pursued in Manchuria at the turn of the twentieth century, seeking to define the ideal diplomatic direction for the nation. The analysis first identifies Crises of Japan as practical argumentation because it strongly urges a transformation of Japan’s overseas policies from old diplomacy to new diplomacy. The study then clarifies that Crises of Japan employs the contrasting conceptual pair of new diplomacy and old diplomacy to reflect the required criteria for a righteous foreign policy. Viewed in this light, this conceptual pair functions not merely as a diplomatic standard, but fundamentally as a value leverage defining the desired path for the nation from a world-historical standpoint. This mechanism is highly consistent with the function of the dissociation of concepts, which, by breaking a previously unitary notion into two hierarchically ordered components, “brings about a more or less profound change in the conceptual data that are used as the basis of argument,” and consequently “remodel[s] our conception of reality” (Perelman and Olbrechts–Tyteca 1969, 412 –3). The analysis thus reinforces the critical role of conceptual dissociation in presenting essential value premises within practical argumentation.