David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Cambridge University Press (2008)
Recent work in artificial intelligence has increasingly turned to argumentation as a rich, interdisciplinary area of research that can provide new methods related to evidence and reasoning in the area of law. Douglas Walton provides an introduction to basic concepts, tools and methods in argumentation theory and artificial intelligence as applied to the analysis and evaluation of witness testimony. He shows how witness testimony is by its nature inherently fallible and sometimes subject to disastrous failures. At the same time such testimony can provide evidence that is not only necessary but inherently reasonable for logically guiding legal experts to accept or reject a claim. Walton shows how to overcome the traditional disdain for witness testimony as a type of evidence shown by logical positivists, and the views of trial sceptics who doubt that trial rules deal with witness testimony in a way that yields a rational decision-making process
|Keywords||Law Methodology Witnesses Evidence (Law Reasoning Artificial intelligence Relevance (Philosophy|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Buy the book||$7.50 used (93% off) $23.87 new (78% off) $110.00 direct from Amazon Amazon page|
|Call number||K213.W355 2008|
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
Adam J. L. Harris, Ulrike Hahn, Jens K. Madsen & Anne S. Hsu (2015). The Appeal to Expert Opinion: Quantitative Support for a Bayesian Network Approach. Cognitive Science 40 (1):n/a-n/a.
Ulrike Hahn & Jos Hornikx (2016). A Normative Framework for Argument Quality: Argumentation Schemes with a Bayesian Foundation. Synthese 193 (6):1833-1873.
Norman Fenton, Martin Neil & David A. Lagnado (2013). A General Structure for Legal Arguments About Evidence Using Bayesian Networks. Cognitive Science 37 (1):61-102.
Axel Gelfert (2011). Expertise, Argumentation, and the End of Inquiry. Argumentation 25 (3):297-312.
Douglas Walton (2016). Some Artificial Intelligence Tools for Argument Evaluation: An Introduction. Argumentation 30 (3):317-340.
Similar books and articles
Douglas Walton (2009). Hendrik Kaptein, Henry Prakken and Bart Verheij (Eds): Review of Legal Evidence and Proof: Statistics, Stories, Logic. [REVIEW] Artificial Intelligence and Law 17 (4):371-377.
Douglas Walton (2003). Is There a Burden of Questioning? Artificial Intelligence and Law 11 (1):1-43.
Hans F. M. Crombag (1993). On the Artificiality of Artificial Intelligence. Artificial Intelligence and Law 2 (1):39-49.
Richard Susskind (1993). The Importance of Commercial Case Studies in Artificial Intelligence and Law. Artificial Intelligence and Law 2 (1):65-67.
Floris J. Bex, Peter J. van Koppen, Henry Prakken & Bart Verheij (2010). A Hybrid Formal Theory of Arguments, Stories and Criminal Evidence. Artificial Intelligence and Law 18 (2):123-152.
Peter Wahlgren (1992). Automation of Legal Reasoning: A Study on Artificial Intelligence and Law. Kluwer Law and Taxation Publishers.
Michael S. Pardo (2008). Review of Douglas Walton, Witness Testimony Evidence: Argumentation, Artificial Intelligence, and Law. [REVIEW] Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews 2008 (11).
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.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads24 ( #160,520 of 1,907,511 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #341,955 of 1,907,511 )
How can I increase my downloads?