David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Artificial Intelligence and Law 16 (2):209-243 (2008)
The notions of burden of proof and presumption are central to law, but as noted in McCormick on Evidence, they are also the slipperiest of any of the family of legal terms employed in legal reasoning. However, recent studies of burden of proof and presumption (Prakken et al. 2005; Prakken and Sartor 2006). Gordon et al. (2007) offer formal models that can render them into precise tools useful for legal reasoning. In this paper, the various theories and formal models are comparatively evaluated with the aim of working out a more comprehensive theory that can integrate the components of the argumentation structure on which they are based. It is shown that the notion of presumption has both a logical component and a dialectical component, and the new theory of presumption developed in the paper, called the dialogical theory, combines these two components.
|Keywords||Evidence Burden of proof Burden of persuasion Argumentation schemes Shifting burden Expert opinion evidence Formal dialog systems|
|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
Fabrizio Macagno & Douglas Walton (2012). Presumptions in Legal Argumentation. Ratio Juris 25 (3):271-300.
Similar books and articles
Rebecca Collins (2005). Posthumous Reproduction and the Presumption Against Consent in Cases of Death Caused by Sudden Trauma. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 30 (4):431 – 442.
H. Prakken & G. Sartor (1996). A Dialectical Model of Assessing Conflicting Arguments in Legal Reasoning. Artificial Intelligence and Law 4 (3-4):331-368.
Fabrizio Macagno (2011). The Presumptions of Meaning. Informal Logic 31 (4):368-394.
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.
Aaron Holland (2001). Consistency in Presuming Agnosticism. Philo 4 (1):82-89.
David Christensen & Hilary Kornblith (1997). Testimony, Memory and the Limits of the a Priori. Philosophical Studies 86 (1):1-20.
Henry Prakken (2008). A Formal Model of Adjudication Dialogues. Artificial Intelligence and Law 16 (3):305-328.
Nicholas Rescher (2006). Presumption and the Practices of Tentative Cognition. Cambridge University Press.
Victor Tadros (2007). Rethinking the Presumption of Innocence. Criminal Law and Philosophy 1 (2):193-213.
David Godden & Douglas Walton (2007). A Theory of Presumption for Everyday Argumentation. Pragmatics and Cognition 15 (2):313-346.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads16 ( #104,063 of 1,102,836 )
Recent downloads (6 months)5 ( #61,870 of 1,102,836 )
How can I increase my downloads?