Ratio Juris 21 (4):496-506 (2008)
|Abstract||In legal decisions standpoints can be supported by formal and also by substantive interpretative arguments. Formal arguments consist of reasons the weight or force of which is essentially dependent on the authoritativeness that the reasons may also have: In this connection one may think of linguistic and systemic arguments. On the other hand, substantive arguments are not backed up by authority, but consist of a direct invocation of moral, political, economic, or other social considerations. Formal arguments can be analyzed as exclusionary reasons: The authoritative character excludes—in principle—substantial counterarguments. Formal arguments are sometimes used to conceal value judgements based on substantial arguments. This paper deals with reconstructing problems regarding this strategic use of formal arguments in legal decisions, with a focus on linguistic argumentation.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
H. Prakken & G. Sartor (1996). A Dialectical Model of Assessing Conflicting Arguments in Legal Reasoning. Artificial Intelligence and Law 4 (3-4):331-368.
Jean Paul van Bendegem & Bart van Kerkhove (2009). Mathematical Arguments in Context. Foundations of Science 14 (1-2):45-57.
Matti Ilmari Niemi (2010). Form and Substance in Legal Reasoning: Two Conceptions. Ratio Juris 23 (4):479-492.
Bart Verheij (2003). Dialectical Argumentation with Argumentation Schemes: An Approach to Legal Logic. [REVIEW] Artificial Intelligence and Law 11 (2-3):167-195.
Henry Prakken (2011). Argumentation Without Arguments. Argumentation 25 (2):171-184.
Floris Bex, Henry Prakken, Chris Reed & Douglas Walton (2003). Towards a Formal Account of Reasoning About Evidence: Argumentation Schemes and Generalisations. [REVIEW] Artificial Intelligence and Law 11 (2-3):125-165.
José Plug (2000). Indicators of Obiter Dicta. A Pragma-Dialectical Analysis of Textual Clues for the Reconstruction of Legal Argumentation. Artificial Intelligence and Law 8 (2-3):189-203.
Douglas N. Walton (2006). Fundamentals of Critical Argumentation. Cambridge University Press.
Juan Barba (2007). Formal Semantics in the Age of Pragmatics. Linguistics and Philosophy 30 (6):637-668.
Henry Prakken (2008). A Formal Model of Adjudication Dialogues. Artificial Intelligence and Law 16 (3):305-328.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads5 ( #169,941 of 722,786 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #60,541 of 722,786 )
How can I increase my downloads?