David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Ratio Juris 23 (4):479-492 (2010)
There are two possible ways to understand form and substance in legal reasoning. The first refers to the distinction between concepts and their applications, whereas the second concentrates on the difference between authoritative and non-authoritative reasons. These approaches refer to the formalistic and positivistic conceptions of the law, the latter being the author's point of departure. Nevertheless, they are both helpful means of analysis in legal interpretation. Interpretation is divided into formal and substantive justification. They have certain functions and they are utilized in interaction. Authoritative reasons and formal reasoning constitute the necessary point of departure. However, substantive reasons are also necessary in order to justify choices included in interpretation. In addition to formal and substantive reasoning, the role of legal concepts is analysed
|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
Aristotle (1960). Metaphysics. Univ of Michigan Pr.
H. L. A. Hart (1994). The Concept of Law. Oxford University Press.
Hans Kelsen (1945/1999). General Theory of Law and State. Lawbook Exchange.
Hans Kelsen (1967/2005). Pure Theory of Law. Lawbook Exchange.
Ernest Joseph Weinrib (1995). The Idea of Private Law. Harvard University Press.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
F. Atria (1999). Legal Reasoning and Legal Theory Revisited. Law and Philosophy 18 (5):537-577.
Kurt Nutting (2002). Legal Practices and the Reason of the Law. Argumentation 16 (1):111-133.
Harm Kloosterhuis (2008). The Strategic Use of Formal Argumentation in Legal Decisions. Ratio Juris 21 (4):496-506.
Giovanni Sartor (1992). Normative Conflicts in Legal Reasoning. Artificial Intelligence and Law 1 (2-3):209-235.
Aldo Schiavello (2011). Neil MacCormick's Second Thoughts on Legal Reasoning and Legal Theory. A Defence of the Original View. Ratio Juris 24 (2):140-155.
Neil MacCormick (2005). Rhetoric and the Rule of Law: A Theory of Legal Reasoning. Oxford University Press.
Jaap Hage (1997). Reasoning with Rules: An Essay on Legal Reasoning and its Underlying Logic. Kluwer.
Barbara Baum Levenbook (1984). On Universal Relevance in Legal Reasoning. Law and Philosophy 3 (1):1 - 23.
David T. Ritchie (2008). Mastering Legal Analysis and Communication. Carolina Academic Press.
Amalia Amaya (2011). Legal Justification by Optimal Coherence. Ratio Juris 24 (3):304-329.
Jaap Hage (2004). Comparing Alternatives in the Law. Artificial Intelligence and Law 12 (3):181-225.
Added to index2010-11-15
Total downloads28 ( #65,475 of 1,099,914 )
Recent downloads (6 months)10 ( #24,108 of 1,099,914 )
How can I increase my downloads?