Conceptual metaphor of argument is war" in televised debates on Iran's 2021 presidential election (based on Lakoff and Johnson theory)

The debates in the thirteenth presidential election provided a platform for insight, value, and pathology, derived from metaphorical expressions to convey and reflect conceptual propositions in the pursuit of political goals, political aspirations, and the motivation of the audience to feel appropriate. And was able to help with a better understanding of issues and crises in the political, economic, cultural and social spheres with the experience and terms of everyday life. "George Lakoff" and "Mark Johnson", by challenging classical metaphorical views limited to literature and rhetoric, extended the method to the political and philosophical realms, emphasizing the role of metaphors in concepts rather than words; In everyday life, not among scientists and artists, and finally metaphor was considered an inevitable process of thought and reasoning to better understand issues related to various areas of human life. The purpose of this study is to answer the main question: what key metaphor has been used in the form of hiding and highlighting in these televised debates? This article has been interpreted and explained by "exploratory" method and using "Qualitative Data Analysis" software. Research findings show that the debates usually follow patterns that have structured the conceptual network of war to some extent and have used linguistic metaphors such as infiltration, field, commander, neutralization, power, destruction, and defeat.