Dichotomies and oppositions in legal argumentation

Ratio Juris 23 (2):229-257 (2010)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
In this paper we use a series of examples to show how oppositions and dichotomies are fundamental in legal argumentation, and vitally important to be aware of, because of their twofold nature. On the one hand, they are argument structures underlying various kinds of rational argumentation commonly used in law as a means of getting to the truth in a conflict of opinion under critical discussion by two opposing sides before a tryer of fact. On the other hand, they are argument structures underling moves made in strategic advocacy by both sides that function as platforms for different kinds of questionable argumentation tactics and moves that are in some instances tricky and deceptive
No keywords specified (fix it)
PhilPapers/Archive ID
Revision history
Archival date: 2015-08-27
View upload history
References found in this work BETA
Argumentation Schemes.Walton, Douglas; Reed, Chris & Macagno, Fabrizio
Argumentation Schemes.Walton, Douglas; Reed, Christopher & Macagno, Fabrizio
A Natural History of Negation.Barwise, Jon & Horn, Laurence R.
Fallacies.Hamblin, C. L.

View all 13 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

Added to PP index

Total views
134 ( #25,118 of 45,291 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
14 ( #39,786 of 45,291 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks to external links.