The article analyzes the argumentative structure of network communicative persuasion using the example of the social network “Mash on the Moika”. The main idea of the article is that reasoning, as an argumentative process of seeking justifications, is not based solely on logocentrism and can involve the intuitive acceptance of arguments for values, justifications, preferences and opinions. In this case, the argumentative mechanism for substantiating judgments correlates well with the network concept of communication due to the fact that networks are not only a simple transmitter of information, but also contain a structure that ensures the choice of arguments by the very fact of the design features of the communication process - the relative position of nodes/vertices and connections. Argumentation in the network is provided by two main processes of individuation and network solidarity: the higher the intensity indicators of the processes, the more grounds for structural argumentation. A structural approach to network argumentation is represented by the analysis of network metrics, which includes indicators of individuation (eigenvector centrality, average path length, closeness centrality) and network solidarity (density, closeness centrality, assortativity, modularity). Network analysis was carried out using the Gephi and Python programming languages.