David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Artificial Intelligence and Law 1 (2-3):209-235 (1992)
This article proposes a formal analysis of a fundamental aspect of legal reasoning: dealing with normative conflicts. Firstly, examples are illustrated concerning the dynamics of legal systems, the application of rules and exceptions, and the semantic indeterminacy of legal sources. Then two approaches to cope with conflicting information are presented: the preferred theories of Brewka, and the belief change functions of Alchourrón, Gärdenfors, and Makinson. The relations between those approaches are closely examined, and some aspects of a model of reasoning with normative conflicts are outlined. Since this model takes into account an ordering of the involved regulations, criteria to order legal norms are finally specified.
|Keywords||non-monotonic reasoning belief revision rules and exceptions normative conflicts|
|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
C. E. Alchourrón & D. Makinson (1981). New Studies in Deontic Logic. In Risto Hilpinen (ed.), New Studies in Deontic Logic. 125--148.
Carlos E. Alchourrón, Peter Gärdenfors & David Makinson (1985). On the Logic of Theory Change: Partial Meet Contraction and Revision Functions. Journal of Symbolic Logic 50 (2):510-530.
Carlos E. Alchourrón & David Makinson (1985). On the Logic of Theory Change: Safe Contraction. Studia Logica 44 (4):405 - 422.
Carlos E. Alchourron & David Makinson (1982). On the Logic of Theory Change: Contraction Functions and Their Associated Revision Functions. Theoria 48 (1):14-37.
Gerhard Brewka (1991). Nonmonotonic Reasoning: Logical Foundations of Commonsense. Cambridge University Press.
Citations of this work BETA
Giovanni Sartor (1994). A Formal Model of Legal Argumentation. Ratio Juris 7 (2):177-211.
Similar books and articles
Astrid Link, Descriptive and Normative Aspects of the Theory of Legal Pluralism : Illustrated by Problems of Media Regulation.
Kurt Nutting (2002). Legal Practices and the Reason of the Law. Argumentation 16 (1):111-133.
Seana Carole Sugrue (2000). The Somatic State: The Dialectics of Law's Morality. Dissertation, Mcgill University (Canada)
Amalia Amaya (2011). Legal Justification by Optimal Coherence. Ratio Juris 24 (3):304-329.
H. Prakken & G. Sartor (1996). A Dialectical Model of Assessing Conflicting Arguments in Legal Reasoning. Artificial Intelligence and Law 4 (3-4):331-368.
F. Atria (1999). Legal Reasoning and Legal Theory Revisited. Law and Philosophy 18 (5):537-577.
David Martinez-Zorrilla (2011). The Structure of Conflicts of Fundamental Legal Rights. Law and Philosophy 30 (6):729-749.
Jaap Hage (1996). A Theory of Legal Reasoning and a Logic to Match. Artificial Intelligence and Law 4 (3-4):199-273.
Lou Goble (2009). Normative Conflicts and the Logic of 'Ought'. Noûs 43 (3):450-489.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads44 ( #60,395 of 1,700,244 )
Recent downloads (6 months)8 ( #77,273 of 1,700,244 )
How can I increase my downloads?