Results for 'legal arguments'

999 found
Order:
  1. Modelling competing legal arguments using Bayesian model comparison and averaging.Martin Neil, Norman Fenton, David Lagnado & Richard David Gill - 2019 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 27 (4):403-430.
    Bayesian models of legal arguments generally aim to produce a single integrated model, combining each of the legal arguments under consideration. This combined approach implicitly assumes that variables and their relationships can be represented without any contradiction or misalignment, and in a way that makes sense with respect to the competing argument narratives. This paper describes a novel approach to compare and ‘average’ Bayesian models of legal arguments that have been built independently and with (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  2. Presumptions in Legal Argumentation.Fabrizio Macagno & Douglas Walton - 2012 - Ratio Juris 25 (3):271-300.
    In this paper a theoretical definition that helps to explain how the logical structure of legal presumptions is constructed by applying the Carneades model of argumentation developed in artificial intelligence. Using this model, it is shown how presumptions work as devices used in evidentiary reasoning in law in the event of a lack of evidence to assist a chain of reasoning to move forward to prove or disprove a claim. It is shown how presumptions work as practical devices that (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   9 citations  
  3. Dichotomies and oppositions in legal argumentation.Fabrizio Macagno & Douglas Walton - 2010 - Ratio Juris 23 (2):229-257.
    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 (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  4. Arguments and Stories in Legal Reasoning: The Case of Evidence Law.Gianluca Andresani - 2020 - Archiv Fuer Rechts Und Sozialphilosphie 106 (1):75-90.
    We argue that legal argumentation, as the subject matter as well as a special subfield of Argumentation Studies (AS), has to be examined by making skilled use of the full panoply of tools such as argumentation and story schemes which are at the forefront of current work in AS. In reviewing the literature, we make explicit our own methodological choices (particularly regarding the place of normative deliberation in practical reasoning) and then illustrate the implications of such an approach through (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  5. Antipositivist Arguments from Legal Thought and Talk: The Metalinguistic Response.David Plunkett & Tim Sundell - 2013 - In Graham Hubbs & Douglas Lind (eds.), Pragmatism, Law, and Language. New York: Routledge. pp. 56-75.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   21 citations  
  6. Against Legal Punishment.Nathan Hanna - 2022 - In Matthew C. Altman (ed.), The Palgrave Handbook on the Philosophy of Punishment. Palgrave-Macmillan. pp. 559-78.
    I argue that legal punishment is morally wrong because it’s too morally risky. I first briefly explain how my argument differs from similar ones in the philosophical literature on legal punishment. Then I explain why legal punishment is morally risky, argue that it’s too morally risky, and discuss objections. In a nutshell, my argument goes as follows. Legal punishment is wrong because we can never sufficiently reduce the risk of doing wrong when we legally punish people. (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  7. The "No Interest" Argument Against the Rights of Nature.Neil W. Williams - forthcoming - Philosophers' Imprint.
    Awarding rights to rivers, forests, and other environmental entities (EEs) is a new and increasingly popular approach to environmental protection. The distinctive feature of such rights of nature (RoN) legislation is that direct duties are owed to the EEs. This paper presents a novel rebuttal of the strongest argument against RoN: the no interest argument. The crux of this argument is that because EEs are not sentient, they cannot possess the kinds of interests necessary to ground direct duties. Therefore, they (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  8.  74
    Análisis del discurso y sociopragmática histórica en un debate legal en la Cartagena de Indias del siglo XVIII. Intensificación y atenuación como recursos argumentales: Discourse analysis and historical sociopragmatics in a legal debate in Cartagena de Indias of the eighteenth century. Intensification and mitigation as argumentative resources.Micaela Carrera De La Red - 2013 - Pragmática Sociocultural 1 (1):11-45.
    Resumen Este trabajo consiste en un análisis histórico de textos que proceden de un expediente archivístico de Cartagena de Indias entre 1715 y 1717. Los autos son textos administrativos que poseen diversas funciones en las relaciones institucionales entre metrópoli y colonias, tal como la de “emitir opinión”. En la tipología textual indiana, esta función se denomina consulta o parecer, y se caracteriza por el uso de un predicado de tipo doxástico. Para el análisis hemos adoptado las perspectivas teóricas del análisis (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  9. 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 (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   14 citations  
  10. Emotive Language in Argumentation.Fabrizio Macagno & Douglas Walton - 2014 - New York: Cambridge University Press.
    This book analyzes the uses of emotive language and redefinitions from pragmatic, dialectical, epistemic and rhetorical perspectives, investigating the relationship between emotions, persuasion and meaning, and focusing on the implicit dimension of the use of a word and its dialectical effects. It offers a method for evaluating the persuasive and manipulative uses of emotive language in ordinary and political discourse. Through the analysis of political speeches and legal arguments, the book offers a systematic study of emotive language in (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   64 citations  
  11. Arguments of statutory interpretation and argumentation schemes.Fabrizio Macagno & Douglas Walton - 2017 - International Journal of Legal Discourse 1 (21):47–83.
    In this paper it is shown how certain defeasible argumentation schemes can be used to represent the logical structure of the most common types of argument used for statutory interpretation both in civil and common law. The method is based on an argumentation structure in which the conclusion, namely, the meaning attributed to a legal source, is modeled as a claim that needs that is be supported by pro and con defeasible arguments. The defeasible nature of each scheme (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  12. Legal Institutionalism: Capitalism and the Constitutive Role of Law.Simon Deakin, David Gindis, Geoffrey M. Hodgson, Kainan Huang & Katharina Pistor - 2017 - Journal of Comparative Economics 45 (1):188-20.
    Social scientists have paid insufficient attention to the role of law in constituting the economic institutions of capitalism. Part of this neglect emanates from inadequate conceptions of the nature of law itself. Spontaneous conceptions of law and property rights that downplay the role of the state are criticized here, because they typically assume relatively small numbers of agents and underplay the complexity and uncertainty in developed capitalist systems. In developed capitalist economies, law is sustained through interaction between private agents, courts (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   11 citations  
  13. The Disunity of Legal Reality.David Plunkett & Daniel Wodak - 2022 - Legal Theory 28 (3):235-267.
    Take “legal reality” to be the part of reality that actual legal thought and talk is dis- tinctively about, such as legal institutions, legal obligations, and legal norms. Our goal is to explore whether legal reality is disunified. To illustrate the issue, consider the possibility that an important metaphysical thesis such as positivism is true of one part of legal reality (legal institutions), but not another (legal norms). We offer two (...) that suggest that legal reality is disunified: one concerns the heteroge- neity of different entities that are part of legal reality; the other concerns variation within legal thought and talk. We then show that taking the possibility of the disunity of legal reality seriously has important upshots for how we think about the positivist and antipositivist traditions, the debate between them, and their relation to other parts of legal theory, such as critical legal theory and legal realism. (shrink)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  14. Argument Diagramming in Logic, Artificial Intelligence, and Law.Chris Reed, Douglas Walton & Fabrizio Macagno - 2007 - The Knowledge Engineering Review 22 (1):87-109.
    In this paper, we present a survey of the development of the technique of argument diagramming covering not only the fields in which it originated - informal logic, argumentation theory, evidence law and legal reasoning – but also more recent work in applying and developing it in computer science and artificial intelligence. Beginning with a simple example of an everyday argument, we present an analysis of it visualised as an argument diagram constructed using a software tool. In the context (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   12 citations  
  15. Legal Archetypes and Metadata Collection.Alan Rubel - 2017 - Wisconsin International Law Review 34 (4):823-853.
    In discussions of state surveillance, the values of privacy and security are often set against one another, and people often ask whether privacy is more important than national security.2 I will argue that in one sense privacy is more important than national security. Just what more important means is its own question, though, so I will be more precise. I will argue that national security rationales cannot by themselves justify some kinds of encroachments on individual privacy (including some kinds that (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  16.  41
    Legal Pragmatism as a guide to new perspectives on the application of Law.Alvaro de Azevedo Gonzaga, Felipe Labruna & Cassiano Mazon - 2024 - Revista da Faculdade de Direito Do Sul de Minas 40 (1):129-144.
    This is an article about Legal Pragmatism, studied under the prism of the Philosophy of Law. The pragmatist philosophical current, born in the United States, was responsible for consolidating the line of legal reasoning aimed at obtaining the results that best meet social desires and human hopes. Legal Pragmatism is not presented as a Theory of Law, consubstantiating itself, in reality, in a method based on argumentation, capable of substantiating decision making. Finally, an attempt was made to (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  17. Robust Normativity, Morality, and Legal Positivism.David Plunkett - 2019 - In Toh Kevin, Plunkett David & Shapiro Scott (eds.), Dimensions of Normativity: New Essays on Metaethics and Jurisprudence. New York: Oxford University Press. pp. 105-136.
    This chapter discusses two different issues about the relationship between legal positivism and robust normativity (understood as the most authoritative kind of normativity to which we appeal). First, the chapter argues that, in many contexts when discussing “legal positivism” and “legal antipositivism”, the discussion should be shifted from whether legal facts are ultimately partly grounded in moral facts to whether they are ultimately partly grounded in robustly normative facts. Second, the chapter explores an important difference within (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   10 citations  
  18. Argument and the "Moral Impact" Theory of Law.Alani Golanski - 2019 - Washington University Jurisprudence Review 11:293-343.
    The innovative Moral Impact Theory (“MIT”) of law claims that the moral impacts of legal institutional actions, rather than the linguistic content of “rules” or judicial or legislative pronouncements, determine law’s content. MIT’s corollary is that legal interpretation consists in the inquiry into what is morally required as a consequence of the lawmaking actions. This paper challenges MIT by critiquing its attendant view of the nature of legal interpretation and argument. Points including the following: (1) it is (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  19. Kant's Legal Metaphor and the Nature of a Deduction.Ian Proops - 2003 - Journal of the History of Philosophy 41 (2):209-229.
    This essay partly builds on and partly criticizes a striking idea of Dieter Henrich. Henrich argues that Kant's distinction in the first Critique between the question of fact (quid facti) and the question of law (quid juris) provides clues to the argumentative structure of a philosophical "Deduction". Henrich suggests that the unity of apperception plays a role analogous to a legal factum. By contrast, I argue, first, that the question of fact in the first Critique is settled by the (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   24 citations  
  20. 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 (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  21.  54
    Legal misinterpretation.Timothy Endicott - 2022 - Jurisprudence 13 (1):99-106.
    In his book, _Interpretation without Truth_, Pierluigi Chiassoni articulates the sceptical view that the province of legal interpretation is ‘a province without truth’. A misinterpretation is a false interpretation, and I argue that the widespread phenomenon of legal misinterpretation gives us reason to resist the sceptical conclusion. The potential for a legal interpretation to be a false interpretation –a misinterpretation– implies that a legal interpretation can be true. And legal misinterpretations can be understood as interpretations (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  22. Externalist Argument Against Medical Assistance in Dying for Psychiatric Illness.Hane Htut Maung - 2023 - Journal of Medical Ethics 49 (8):553-557.
    Medical assistance in dying, which includes voluntary euthanasia and assisted suicide, is legally permissible in a number of jurisdictions, including the Netherlands, Belgium, Switzerland and Canada. Although medical assistance in dying is most commonly provided for suffering associated with terminal somatic illness, some jurisdictions have also offered it for severe and irremediable psychiatric illness. Meanwhile, recent work in the philosophy of psychiatry has led to a renewed understanding of psychiatric illness that emphasises the role of the relation between the person (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  23. Common Knowledge and Argumentation Schemes .Fabrizio Macagno & Douglas Walton - 2005 - Studies in Communication Sciences 5 (2):1-22.
    We argue that common knowledge, of the kind used in reasoning in law and computing is best analyzed using a dialogue model of argumentation (Walton & Krabbe 1995). In this model, implicit premises resting on common knowledge are analyzed as endoxa or widely accepted opinions and generalizations (Tardini 2005). We argue that, in this sense, common knowledge is not really knowledge of the kind represent by belief and/or knowledge of the epistemic kind studied in current epistemology. This paper takes a (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  24. Interpreting Straw Man Argumentation.Fabrizio Macagno & Douglas Walton - 2017 - Amsterdam: Springer.
    This book shows how research in linguistic pragmatics, philosophy of language, and rhetoric can be connected through argumentation to analyze a recognizably common strategy used in political and everyday conversation, namely the distortion of another’s words in an argumentative exchange. Straw man argumentation refers to the modification of a position by misquoting, misreporting or wrenching the original speaker’s statements from their context in order to attack them more easily or more effectively. Through 63 examples taken from different contexts (including political (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   21 citations  
  25. Legal oughts, Normative Transmission, and the Nazi Use of Analogy.Carolyn Benson & Julian Fink - 2012 - Jurisprudence 3 (2):445-463.
    In 1935, the Nazi government introduced what came to be known as the abrogation of the pro- hibition of analogy. This measure, a feature of the new penal law, required judges to stray from the letter of the written law and to consider instead whether an action was worthy of pun- ishment according to the ‘sound perception of the people’ and the ‘underlying principle’ of existing criminal statutes. In discussions of Nazi law, an almost unanimous conclusion is that a system (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  26.  78
    Linkage Arguments for and Against Rights".James Nickel - 2022 - Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 42 (1):27-47.
    This article is about relations of support and conflict within systems of fundamental legal rights—and the arguments for and against rights that those relations make possible. Justificatory linkage arguments defend controversial rights by claiming that they provide very useful support to the realisation of well-accepted rights. This article analyses such arguments in detail and discusses their structures, uses and pitfalls. It then shows that linkage arguments can be used not just to defend rights, but also (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  27. "Common Arguments about Abortion" and "Better (Philosophical) Arguments About Abortion".Nathan Nobis & Kristina Grob - 2019 - Introduction to Ethics: An Open Educational Resource.
    Two chapters -- "Common Arguments about Abortion" and "Better (Philosophical) Arguments About Abortion" -- in one file, from the open access textbook "Introduction to Ethics: An Open Educational Resource" edited by Noah Levin. -/- Adults, children and babies are arguably wrong to kill, fundamentally, because we are conscious, aware and have feelings. Since early fetuses entirely lack these characteristics, we argue that they are not inherently wrong to kill and so most abortions are not morally wrong, since most (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  28. Lon Fuller's Legal Structuralism.William Conklin - 2012 - In Bjarne Melkevik (ed.), Standing Tall Hommages a Csaba Varga. Budapest: Pazmany Press. pp. 97-121.
    Anglo-American general jurisprudence remains preoccupied with the relationship of legality to morality. This has especially been so in the re-reading of Lon Fuller’s theory of an implied morality in any law. More often than not, Fuller has been said to distinguish between the identity of a discrete rule and something called ‘morality’. In this reading of Fuller, however, insufficient attention to what is signified by ‘morality’. Such an implied morality has been understood in terms of deontological duties, the Good life, (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  29. Arguments against the Free Use of Beasts as Sexual Objects.John D. Baldari - manuscript
    In this paper, I intend to deny the morality and instrumentality of the behavior known as bestiality, or the use of non-human animals for sexual gratification by human beings. While to most modern peoples, this hardly even seems like it should be in question, it should be the nature of the human mind to occasionally question long-standing traditional moray in the hopes of finding solutions to problems and the disbanding of superstition. It has been proposed that the moral question, and (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  30. Kelsen, Hart, and Legal Normativity.Brian Bix - 2018 - Revus. Journal for Constitutional Theory and Philosophy of Law / Revija Za Ustavno Teorijo in Filozofijo Prava 34:25-42.
    This article focuses on issues relating to legal normativity, emphasizing the way these matters have been elaborated in the works of Kelsen and Hart and later commentators on their theories. First, in Section 2, the author offers a view regarding the nature of law and legal normativity focusing on Kelsen's work (at least one reasonable reading of it). The argument is that the Basic Norm is presupposed when a citizen chooses to read the actions of legal officials (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  31. Legal Speech and Implicit Content in the Law.Luke William Hunt - 2016 - Ratio Juris 29 (1):3-22.
    Interpreting the content of the law is not limited to what a relevant lawmaker utters. This paper examines the extent to which implied and implicit content is part of the law, and specifically whether the Gricean concept of conversational implicature is relevant in determining the content of law. Recent work has focused on how this question relates to acts of legislation. This paper extends the analysis to case law and departs from the literature on several key issues. The paper's argument (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  32. Wedding Cakes and Muslims: Religious Freedom and Politics in contemporary American legal practice.Jon Mahoney - 2019 - Politologija 1:25-36.
    This paper offers a critical examination of two recent American Supreme Court verdicts, Masterpiece Cake Shop v Colorado Civil Rights Commission and Trump v Hawaii. In Masterpiece the Court ruled against the state of Colorado on grounds that religious bias on the part of state officials undermines government’s authority to enforce a policy that might otherwise be constitutional. In Trump the Court ruled in favor of an executive order severely restricting immigration from seven countries, five of which are Muslim majority. (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  33. Dialectical and heuristic arguments: presumptions and burden of proof.Fabrizio Macagno - 2010 - In C. Tindale & C. Reed (eds.), Dialectics, Dialogue and Argumentation: An Examination of Douglas Walton's Theories of Reasoning and Argument. College Publications. pp. 45-57.
    Presumption is a complex concept in law, affecting the dialogue setting. However, it is not clear how presumptions work in everyday argumentation, in which the concept of “plausible argumentation” seems to encompass all kinds of inferences. By analyzing the legal notion of presumption, it appears that this type of reasoning combines argument schemes with reasoning from ignorance. Presumptive reasoning can be considered a particular form of reasoning, which needs positive or negative evidence to carry a probative weight on the (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  34. Late scholastic probable arguments and their contrast with rhetorical and demonstrative arguments.James Franklin - 2022 - Philosophical Inquiries 10 (2).
    Aristotle divided arguments that persuade into the rhetorical (which happen to persuade), the dialectical (which are strong so ought to persuade to some degree) and the demonstrative (which must persuade if rightly understood). Dialectical arguments were long neglected, partly because Aristotle did not write a book about them. But in the sixteenth and seventeenth century late scholastic authors such as Medina, Cano and Soto developed a sound theory of probable arguments, those that have logical and not merely (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  35. Hegel on legal and moral responsibility.Mark Alznauer - 2008 - Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 51 (4):365 – 389.
    When Hegel first addresses moral responsibility in the Philosophy of Right, he presupposes that agents are only responsible for what they intended to do, but appears to offer little, if any, justification for this assumption. In this essay, I claim that the first part of the Philosophy of Right, “Abstract Right”, contains an implicit argument that legal or external responsibility (blame for what we have done) is conceptually dependent on moral responsibility proper (blame for what we have intended). This (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  36. MORAL STRUCTURE OF LEGAL OBLIGATION.Kuczynski John-Michael - 2006 - Dissertation, University of California, Santa Barbara
    What are laws, and do they necessarily have any basis in morality? The present work argues that laws are governmental assurances of protections of rights and that concepts of law and legal obligation must therefore be understood in moral terms. There are, of course, many immoral laws. But once certain basic truths are taken into account – in particular, that moral principles have a “dimension of weight”, to use an expression of Ronald Dworkin’s, and also that principled relations are (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  37.  89
    The use of scientific arguments as a mode of justification. What place does it have in politics and law? A case study of EU GMO regulation.Pierre Walckiers - 239 - de Europa:177-212.
    The aim of this master’s thesis is to analyse and highlight the interaction between science, politics and law. More precisely, our research question concerns the use of scientific arguments in social spheres (notably in politics and law) instead of legal or political arguments. In fact, we want to raise the way in which certain actors invoke scientific arguments to impose "objective" elements of fact in debate and, in this way, refrain from politically and "subjectively" discussing these (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  38. Interpretative Disputes, Explicatures, and Argumentative Reasoning.Fabrizio Macagno & Alessandro Capone - 2016 - Argumentation 30 (4):399-422.
    The problem of establishing the best interpretation of a speech act is of fundamental importance in argumentation and communication in general. A party in a dialogue can interpret another’s or his own speech acts in the most convenient ways to achieve his dialogical goals. In defamation law this phenomenon becomes particularly important, as the dialogical effects of a communicative move may result in legal consequences. The purpose of this paper is to combine the instruments provided by argumentation theory with (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   12 citations  
  39. CHANGING THE LEGAL STATUS OF ANIMALS: LEGISLATION AND LITIGATION.Zorana Todorovic - 2022 - Teme 46 (3):835−849.
    This paper addresses the issue of the legal status of non-human animals and the possibility of changing it from the status of things or property to the status of non-things, or better, sentient beings. Key arguments for the change of their status are discussed, including the argument from marginal cases, as well as scientific evidence indicating that many animals are sentient beings. Two ways of initiating such changes seem most promising: legislation, i.e. modification of the civil codes, and (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  40. Computer-Aided Argument Mapping as a Tool for Teaching Critical Thinking.W. Martin Davies - 2014 - International Journal of Learning and Media 4 (3-4):79-84.
    As individuals we often face complex issues about which we must weigh evidence and come to conclusions. Corporations also have to make decisions on the basis of strong and compelling arguments. Legal practitioners, compelled by arguments for or against a proposition and underpinned by the weight of evidence, are often required to make judgments that affect the lives of others. Medical doctors face similar decisions. Governments make purchasing decisions—for example, for expensive military equipment—or decisions in the areas (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  41. The Argument from Back-Street Abortion Revisited.Josiah Della Foresta - manuscript
    Motivated by recent political trends surrounding the legality of abortion, and noting the apparent difficulty with which partisan agreement can be found when engaging with arguments from foetal personhood, this paper revisits a classic axiological argument for the legalisation of abortion which relies on a commitment to the moral relevancy of consequences and the empirically sound nature of said consequences. Academically known as the Argument from Back-Street Abortion, agreement with the argument's premises entails the legalisation of abortion is morally (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  42. Arguments for and against Germline Intervention: A Critical Review of Ronald Green’s Babies by Design.Marvin J. H. Lee & Sophia Lozowski - 2017 - Journal of Healthcare Ethics and Administration 3 (1).
    It seems certain that one day we will allow the genetic technology which will enhance our offspring. A highly effective new tool, called CRISPR, which allows for carving out genes, is already being used to edit the genomes of animals. In July 2017, the FDA legalized that germline drugs for therapeutic purposes could be sold in the market. It is a high time, now, that we need engage in discussions about the ethics of germline intervention. To contribute to the discussion (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  43. A Critique of Critical Legal Studies' Claim of Legal Indeterminacy.Ian Benitez - 2015 - Lambert Academic Publishing.
    This paper challenges the Critical Legal Studies (CLS) claims of legal indeterminacy. It shall use a legal formalist logic and language as its main assertion, further maintaining that the CLS claims is only grounded in ambiguity and confusion. CLS is a legal theory that challenges and overturns accepted norms and standards in legal theory and practice. They maintained that law in the historical and contemporary society has an alleged impartiality, and it is used as a (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  44. Practical Reasoning Arguments: A Modular Approach.Fabrizio Macagno & Douglas Walton - 2018 - Argumentation 32 (4):519-547.
    This paper compares current ways of modeling the inferential structure of practical reasoning arguments, and proposes a new approach in which it is regarded in a modular way. Practical reasoning is not simply seen as reasoning from a goal and a means to an action using the basic argumentation scheme. Instead, it is conceived as a complex structure of classificatory, evaluative, and practical inferences, which is formalized as a cluster of three types of distinct and interlocked argumentation schemes. Using (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   18 citations  
  45. Pragmatic Maxims and Presumptions in Legal Interpretation.Fabrizio Macagno, Douglas Walton & Giovanni Sartor - 2018 - Law and Philosophy 37 (1):69-115.
    The fields of linguistic pragmatics and legal interpretation are deeply interrelated. The purpose of this paper is to show how pragmatics and the developments in argumentation theory can contribute to the debate on legal interpretation. The relation between the pragmatic maxims and the presumptions underlying the legal canons are brought to light, unveiling the principles that underlie the types of argument usually used to justify a construction. The Gricean maxims and the arguments of legal interpretation (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   9 citations  
  46.  89
    Counterfactuals for causal responsibility in legal contexts.Holger Andreas, Matthias Armgardt & Mario Gunther - 2023 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 31 (1):115-132.
    We define a formal semantics of conditionals based on _normatively ideal worlds_. Such worlds are described informally by Armgardt (Gabbay D, Magnani L, Park W, Pietarinen A-V (eds) Natural arguments: a tribute to john woods, College Publications, London, pp 699–708, 2018) to address well-known problems of the counterfactual approach to causation. Drawing on Armgardt’s proposal, we use iterated conditionals in order to analyse causal relations in scenarios of multi-agent interaction. This results in a refined counterfactual approach to causal responsibility (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  47. Reconstructing Multimodal Arguments in Advertisements: Combining Pragmatics and Argumentation Theory.Fabrizio Macagno & Rosalice Botelho Wakim Souza Pinto - 2021 - Argumentation 35 (1):141-176.
    The analysis of multimodal argumentation in advertising is a crucial and problematic area of research. While its importance is growing in a time characterized by images and pictorial messages, the methods used for interpreting and reconstructing the structure of arguments expressed through verbal and visual means capture only isolated dimensions of this complex phenomenon. This paper intends to propose and illustrate a methodology for the reconstruction and analysis of “double-mode” arguments in advertisements, combining the instruments developed in social (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  48.  74
    Against a singular understanding of legal capacity: Criminal responsibility and the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.Jillian Craigie - 2015 - International Journal of Law and Psychiatry 40:6-14.
    The United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) is being used to argue for wider recognition of the legal capacity of people with mental disabilities. This raises a question about the implications of the Convention for attributions of criminal responsibility. The present paper works towards an answer by analysing the relationship between legal capacity in relation to personal decisions and criminal acts. Its central argument is that because moral and political considerations play an essential (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  49. A Populist Argument for Same-Sex Marriage.Alex Rajczi - 2008 - The Monist 91 (3-4):475-505.
    The paper argues that same-sex marriage ought to be legalized. The argument is ecumenical and appeals only to basic principles of liberal government. Specifically, the paper argues that if the government is offering an opportunity to one group, then it may not withhold the opportunity from another on the ground that the people receiving it are immoral or that their receipt of the opportunity would spread immoral messages. The only acceptable ground is that the group’s receipt would cause wrongful harm (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  50. A Kantian Argument for Sustainable Property Use.Stefano Lo Re - 2022 - Studi Kantiani 35:49-64.
    The paper lays the foundations for a duty of sustainable property use based on Kant’s Doctrine of Right. In doing so, it contributes to the project of extending the application of Kant’s philosophy to environmental issues so as to include his legal-political philosophy. After providing some context, focusing in particular on Kant’s property argument, I present and critically evaluate a recent argument for a duty of sustainable property use, put forward by Attila Ataner. Then, I draw on Reinhard Brandt’s (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
1 — 50 / 999