A Case of affirming the consequent in international law: un security council resolution 232 (1966)—southern rhodesia
David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
History and Philosophy of Logic 15 (2):201-210 (1994)
In this note I examine a case of teleological reasoning in international law and find it to be the fallacy of affirming the consequent.I then show that and how the basis of this fallacy is a manipulation (or juxtaposition) of ?necessary? and ?sufficient? conditions.I conclude by giving reasons for thinking that this kind of reasoning is a regular feature of international law
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
M. Kamminga, Final Report on the Impact of International Human Rights Law on General International Law.
David M. Malone & James Cockayne, The UN Security Council: 10 Lessons From Iraq on Regulation and Accountability.
P. Takis Tridimas & Jose A. Gutierrez-Fons, EU Law, International Law and Economic Sanctions Against Terrorism: The Judiciary in Distress?
David Socher (2001). The Textbook Case of Affirming the Consequent. Teaching Philosophy 24 (3):241-251.
Ben Saul, The Dangers of the United Nations' 'New Security Agenda': 'Human Security' in the Asia-Pacific Region.
Jack L. Goldsmith (2007). The Limits of International Law. Oxford University Press.
Michael N. Schmitt * (2004). The Legality of Operation Iraqi Freedom Under International Law. Journal of Military Ethics 3 (2):82-104.
Added to index2010-08-10
Total downloads5 ( #324,832 of 1,696,494 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #342,645 of 1,696,494 )
How can I increase my downloads?