Related

Contents
20 found
Order:
Material to categorize
  1. Jury Reform and Live Deliberation Research.Lewis Ross - 2023 - Amicus Curiae 5 (1):64-70.
    Researchers face perennial difficulties in studying live jury deliberation. As a result, the academic community struggles to reach a consensus on key matters of legal reform concerning jury trials. The hurdles faced by empirical jury researchers are often legal or institutional. This note argues that the legal and institutional barriers preventing live deliberation research should be removed and discusses two forms that live deliberation research could take.
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  2. Strong admissibility for abstract dialectical frameworks.Atefeh Keshavarzi Zafarghandi, Rineke Verbrugge & Bart Verheij - 2022 - Argument and Computation 13 (3):249-289.
    dialectical frameworks have been introduced as a formalism for modeling argumentation allowing general logical satisfaction conditions and the relevant argument evaluation. Different criteria used to settle the acceptance of arguments are called semantics. Semantics of ADFs have so far mainly been defined based on the concept of admissibility. However, the notion of strongly admissible semantics studied for abstract argumentation frameworks has not yet been introduced for ADFs. In the current work we present the concept of strong admissibility of interpretations for (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  3. Lesser Evils, Mere Permissions and Justifying Reasons in Law.Robert Mullins - 2022 - In James Penner & Mark McBride (eds.), New Essays on the Nature of Legal Reasoning. Hart Publishing. pp. 259-280.
    This Chapter is concerned with cases in which we are justified in performing an otherwise prohibited action but not required to perform it. My discussion focusses on cases in which conduct is permitted because it amounts to a ‘lesser evil’. What interests me is the curious nexus that these cases illustrate between justifying reasons and the conclusion that conduct is either permitted or required. So-called reason-based or ‘reasons-first’ accounts hold that our normative conclusions—our conclusions about what we are required to (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  4. An argumentation framework for contested cases of statutory interpretation.Fabrizio Macagno, Giovanni Sartor & Douglas Walton - 2016 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 24 (1):51-91.
    This paper proposes an argumentation-based procedure for legal interpretation, by reinterpreting the traditional canons of textual interpretation in terms of argumentation schemes, which are then classified, formalized, and represented through argument visualization and evaluation tools. The problem of statutory interpretation is framed as one of weighing contested interpretations as pro and con arguments. The paper builds an interpretation procedure by formulating a set of argumentation schemes that can be used to comparatively evaluate the types of arguments used in cases of (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   14 citations  
  5. Statutory Interpretation: Pragmatics and Argumentation.Douglas Walton, Fabrizio Macagno & Giovanni Sartor - 2021 - Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    Statutory interpretation involves the reconstruction of the meaning of a legal statement when it cannot be considered as accepted or granted. This phenomenon needs to be considered not only from the legal and linguistic perspective, but also from the argumentative one - which focuses on the strategies for defending a controversial or doubtful viewpoint. This book draws upon linguistics, legal theory, computing, and dialectics to present an argumentation-based approach to statutory interpretation. By translating and summarizing the existing legal interpretative canons (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  6. Evidential Reasoning.Marcello Di Bello & Bart Verheij - 2011 - In G. Bongiovanni, Don Postema, A. Rotolo, G. Sartor, C. Valentini & D. Walton (eds.), Handbook in Legal Reasoning and Argumentation. Dordrecht, Netherland: Springer. pp. 447-493.
    The primary aim of this chapter is to explain the nature of evidential reasoning, the characteristic difficulties encountered, and the tools to address these difficulties. Our focus is on evidential reasoning in criminal cases. There is an extensive scholarly literature on these topics, and it is a secondary aim of the chapter to provide readers the means to find their way in historical and ongoing debates.
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
Analogical Reasoning in Law
  1. Analogical Arguments: Inferential Structures and Defeasibility Conditions.Fabrizio Macagno, Douglas Walton & Christopher Tindale - 2017 - Argumentation 31 (2):221-243.
    The purpose of this paper is to analyze the structure and the defeasibility conditions of argument from analogy, addressing the issues of determining the nature of the comparison underlying the analogy and the types of inferences justifying the conclusion. In the dialectical tradition, different forms of similarity were distinguished and related to the possible inferences that can be drawn from them. The kinds of similarity can be divided into four categories, depending on whether they represent fundamental semantic features of the (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   14 citations  
  2. Argument from Analogy in Law, the Classical Tradition, and Recent Theories.Fabrizio Macagno & Douglas Walton - 2009 - Philosophy and Rhetoric 42 (2):154-182.
    Argument from analogy is a common and formidable form of reasoning in law and in everyday conversation. Although there is substantial literature on the subject, according to a recent survey ( Juthe 2005) there is little fundamental agreement on what form the argument should take, or on how it should be evaluated. Th e lack of conformity, no doubt, stems from the complexity and multiplicity of forms taken by arguments that fall under the umbrella of analogical reasoning in argumentation, dialectical (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   30 citations  
Rules in Legal Reasoning
  1. How to Identify Norms, Laws and Regulations That Facilitate Illicit Financial Flows and Related Financial Crimes.Tiago Cardao-Pito - forthcoming - Journal of Money Laundering Control.
    Purpose: Illicit financial flows are targeted by the United Nations’ (UN) Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). However, these illicit flows are not entirely understood. Furthermore, they can benefit from economic norms, laws, and regulations that lack mechanisms to detect and penalize them. This paper investigates whether a recent test, the embezzler test, can be used to identify regulatory architectures that facilitate illicit financial flows and related financial crimes. -/- Design/methodology/approach: To develop a more advanced version of the embezzler test in terms (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  2. Opacity of Character: Virtue Ethics and the Legal Admissibility of Character Evidence.Jacob Smith & Georgi Gardiner - 2021 - Philosophical Issues 31 (1):334-354.
    Many jurisdictions prohibit or severely restrict the use of evidence about a defendant’s character to prove legal culpability. Situationists, who argue that conduct is largely determined by situational features rather than by character, can easily defend this prohibition. According to situationism, character evidence is misleading or paltry. -/- Proscriptions on character evidence seem harder to justify, however, on virtue ethical accounts. It appears that excluding character evidence either denies the centrality of character for explaining conduct—the situationist position—or omits probative evidence. (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
Precedent in Legal Reasoning
  1. Default Reasoning and the Law: A Dialogue.Penco Carlo & Canale Damiano - 2022 - Revus. Journal for Constitutional Theory and Philosophy of Law / Revija Za Ustavno Teorijo in Filozofijo Prava 47.
    Reasoning by default is a relevant aspect of everyday life that has traditionally attracted the attention of many fields of research, from psychology to the philosophy of logic, from economics to artificial intelligence. Also in the field of law, default reasoning is widely used by lawyers, judges and other legal decision-makers. In this paper, a philosopher of language (Carlo Penco) and a philosopher of law (Damiano Canale) attempt to explore some uses of default reasoning that are scarcely considered by legal (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  2. Vertical precedents in formal models of precedential constraint.Gabriel L. Broughton - 2019 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 27 (3):253-307.
    The standard model of precedential constraint holds that a court is equally free to modify a precedent of its own and a precedent of a superior court—overruling aside, it does not differentiate horizontal and vertical precedents. This paper shows that no model can capture the U.S. doctrine of precedent without making that distinction. A precise model is then developed that does just that. This requires situating precedent cases in a formal representation of a hierarchical legal structure, and adjusting the constraint (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
Legal Argumentation, Misc
  1. Mock Juries, Real Trials: How to Solve (some) Problems with Jury Science.Lewis Ross - forthcoming - Journal of Law and Society.
    Jury science is fraught with difficulty. Since legal and institutional hurdles render it all but impossible to study live criminal jury deliberation, researchers make use of various indirect methods to evaluate jury performance. But each of these methods are open to methodological criticism and, strikingly, some of the highest-profile jury research programmes in recent years have reached opposing conclusions. Uncertainty about jury performance is an obstacle for legal reform—ongoing debates about the ‘justice gap’ for complainants of sexual offences has rendered (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  2. LA COHERENCIA EN LA ARGUMENTACIÓN JURÍDICA.Amalia Amaya - manuscript
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  3. La teoría de los principios de Robert Alexy. Algunas notas acerca de su interpretación.Noelia Martínez-Doallo - 2023 - In Gonzalo Villa Rosas, Claudia Toledo, Alejandro Nava Tovar & Arnulfo Mateos (eds.), Derecho, argumentación y ponderación. Ensayos en honor a Robert Alexy. Universidad del Externado de Colombia. pp. 287-318.
    A partir de los postulados de una concepción semántica de norma y su clasificación en reglas y principios, Robert Alexy ha enunciado una tesis fuerte de la separación, al concebir que entre ambos tipos de normas no solo existe una diferencia gradual, sino también cualitativa. En este contexto, los principios son descritos como mandatos de optimización, caracterizados por un cumplimiento gradual en atención a las posibilidades reales y jurídicas, y a través de la denominada técnica de la ponderación. A pesar (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  4. What's in a Name? Legal Fictions and Philosophical Fictionalism.Luft Constantin - 2024 - Law and Literature 2:1-22.
    This paper uses analytic philosophy to prevent merely verbal disputes about the concept of fiction within discussions on fictiones iuris. It provides a survey of potentially fruitful connections between legal fictions and fictionalism. More specifically, I will argue that by enriching current accounts of legal fictions in legal theory with insights from (1) the philosophy of language on fictional speech and from (2) contemporary metaphysics on philosophical fictionalism, it seems natural to explore the position that talk involving fictiones iuris is (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  5. Argumenty a klimatické zmeny (Arguments and Climate Changes).Vladimir Marko - 2022 - Bratislava: Univerzita Komenského.
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  6. Specyfika ograniczenia wolności i praw konstytucyjnych w stanach nadzwyczajnych [Extraordinary Measures and Restrictions of Constitutional Freedoms and Rights].Marek Piechowiak - 2021 - In Mirosław Granat (ed.), Sądownictwo konstytucyjne. Teoria i praktyka. Tom IV. Wydawnictwo Naukowe UKSW. pp. 217-261.
    STRESZCZENIE Opracowanie zmierza do udzielenia odpowiedzi na pytanie, czym – z punktu widzenia struktury procesu wykładni i struktury wchodzących w grę wartości konstytucyjnych – różni się ograniczanie wolności i praw w ramach stosowania „zwykłych środków konstytucyjnych”, od ograniczania wolności i praw dopuszczalnego w stanach nadzwyczajnych. Podjęta zostaje problematyka dotyczącą kwestii materialnych, a poza zakresem rozważanych zagadnień pozostają kwestie dotyczące formalnych warunków dopuszczalności ograniczeń, jak publiczne ogłoszenie zagrożenia czy możliwość wprowadzania ograniczeń w aktach podustawowych. Stawiane tezy są polemiczne wobec poglądów, że (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  7. Normas verdaderas a la luz de la justificación axiológica de las normas.Marek Piechowiak - 2017 - In Germán Sucar & Jorge Cerdio Herrán (eds.), Derecho y verdad. Tirant lo Blanch. pp. Vol. IV, 655-681.
    En la Constitución de la República de Polonia del 2 de abril de 19971 se reconocía el carácter objetivo de ciertos valores y un cognoscitivismo axiológico. Si tomamos las disposiciones constitucionales en serio tenemos que aceptar que algunas valoraciones morales o que algunas proferencias [utterances] valorativas pueden ser verdaderas o falsas y que nos informan acerca de una realidad objetiva. Por otro lado, en la teoría del derecho polaca y en los cursos universitarios de lógica para abogados se encuentran definiciones (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  8. Emergencia del institucionalismo en la teoría argumental.María G. Navarro - 2020 - Azafea: Revista de Filosofia 22 (1):167-192.
    One of the challenges related to the discursive practices of argumentative agents is to get to know if those interactions have an institutional effect. In this article, it is argued that in the new institutionalism, theoretical approaches and deterministic analysis are outlined to investigate argumentative practices that take place in processes of legitimation and recognition. Here a double socio-institutional and discursive or constructivist approach to the argumentation theory is defended, and it is argued that this perspective could be extended to (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark