This category needs an editor. We encourage you to help if you are qualified.
Volunteer, or read more about what this involves.
Related

Contents
14 found
Order:
  1. Carens’s Cantilever Argument: Global Freedom of Movement, Logical Necessity and the Burden of Proof.Düring Jeremias & Luft Constantin - 2020 - In Matthias Hoesch & Nadine Mooren (eds.), Joseph Carens: Between Aliens and Citizens. Springer. pp. 161-179.
    In this article we discuss the so-called cantilever argument, used by Joseph Carens to establish a human right to global freedom of movement. First of all, we criticise Carens’s classification of the argument as both an “analogy” and a “logical extension”. Comparing the cantilever argument with Carens’s popular feudalism analogy suggests understanding it solely as an extension, but certainly not as a “logical” one. Finally, we sketch out whether, by means of the cantilever, he succeeds in shifting the burden of (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  2. The Constraining Force of Analogies and the Role of the Judge.Katharina Stevens - 2018 - In Kenneth Einar Himma, Miodrag Jovanovic & Bojan Spaic (eds.), Unpacking Normativity - Conceptual, Normative and Descriptive Issues. New York: Hart Publishing. pp. 187 - 205.
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  3. Analogical Arguments: Inferential Structures and Defeasibility Conditions.Fabrizio Macagno, Douglas Walton & Christopher Tindale - 2017 - Argumentation 31 (2):221-243.
    The purpose of this paper is to analyze the structure and the defeasibility conditions of argument from analogy, addressing the issues of determining the nature of the comparison underlying the analogy and the types of inferences justifying the conclusion. In the dialectical tradition, different forms of similarity were distinguished and related to the possible inferences that can be drawn from them. The kinds of similarity can be divided into four categories, depending on whether they represent fundamental semantic features of the (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   14 citations  
  4. Argument from analogy in legal rhetoric.Douglas Walton - 2013 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 21 (3):279-302.
    This paper applies recent work on scripts and stories developed as tools of evidential reasoning in artificial intelligence to model the use of argument from analogy as a rhetorical device of persuasion. The example studied is Gerry Spence’s closing argument in the case of Silkwood v. Kerr-McGee Corporation, said to be the most persuasive closing argument ever used in an American trial. It is shown using this example how argument from analogy is based on a similarity premise where similarity between (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  5. Understanding blended multi-source arguments as arguments from partial analogies.Marcello Guarini - 2010 - Ratio Juris 23 (1):65-100.
    This paper identifies a type of multi-source (case-based) reasoning and differentiates it from other types of analogical reasoning. Work in cognitive science on mental space mapping or conceptual blending is used to better understand this type of reasoning. The type of argument featured herein will be shown to be a kind of source-blended argument. While it possesses some similarities to traditionally conceived analogical arguments, there are important differences as well. The triple contract (a key development in the usury debates of (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  6. Argument from Analogy in Law, the Classical Tradition, and Recent Theories.Fabrizio Macagno & Douglas Walton - 2009 - Philosophy and Rhetoric 42 (2):154-182.
    Argument from analogy is a common and formidable form of reasoning in law and in everyday conversation. Although there is substantial literature on the subject, according to a recent survey ( Juthe 2005) there is little fundamental agreement on what form the argument should take, or on how it should be evaluated. Th e lack of conformity, no doubt, stems from the complexity and multiplicity of forms taken by arguments that fall under the umbrella of analogical reasoning in argumentation, dialectical (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (11 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   30 citations  
  7. Precedent and analogy in legal reasoning.Grant Lamond - 2008 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
  8. Legal Reason: The Use of Analogy in Legal Argument. [REVIEW]Timothy Kaye - 2005 - Journal of Mind and Behavior 26 (4):307-312.
    Lloyd Weinreb’s Legal Reason: The Use of Analogy in Legal Argument is the latest contribution to a familiar debate. Since the Second World War, a recurrent theme of Anglo–American jurisprudence has been the desire to explain and justify the process of courtroom adjudication, especially at appellate level. Such explanation and justification has proved extraordinarily elusive. According to the doctrine of separation of powers, the functions of the judiciary must differ from those of the legislature and executive. We therefore need to (...)
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  9. Legal Reason: The Use of Analogy in Legal Argument.Lloyd L. Weinreb - 2005 - Cambridge University Press.
    Legal Reason describes and explains the process of analogical reasoning, which is the distinctive feature of legal argument. It challenges the prevailing view, urged by Edward Levi, Cass Sunstein, Richard Posner and others, which regards analogical reasoning as logically flawed or as a defective form of deductive reasoning. It shows that analogical reasoning in the law is the same as the reasoning used by all of us routinely in everyday life and that it is a valid form of reasoning derived (...)
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   19 citations  
  10. Valuing Reasons: Analogy and Epistemic Deference in Legal Argument.Scott Brewer - 1997 - Dissertation, Harvard University
    This thesis addresses two enduring issues in legal theory-- rationality and its association with rule of law values--by offering detailed models of two patterns of legal reasoning. One is reasoning by analogy. The other is the inference process that legal reasoners use when they defer epistemically to scientific experts in the course of reaching legal decisions. Discussions in both chapters reveal that the inference pattern known as "abduction" is a deeply important element of many legal inferences, including analogy and epistemic (...)
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  11. Analogy in legal reasoning.Lawrence C. Becker - 1973 - Ethics 83 (3):248-255.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  12. Logik und Axiologie der analogen Rechtsanwendung. [REVIEW]K. B. L. - 1962 - Review of Metaphysics 15 (3):525-526.
    A meticulous examination of the logical and axiological principles of analogical inference in legal reasoning. The first part presents an elementary but useful survey of traditional and modern logical analyses of analogy and analogical inference. In the second part, these concepts are examined in their juridical applications. Much is made of the conclusion that analogical inference cannot be rendered "binding" by logical considerations alone; to make up for this in legal reasoning, axiological principles must be employed.--L. K. B.
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  13. Analogy Exercises for Teaching Legal Reasoning.Peter Suber - unknown
    Legal reasoning is not the same as the reasoning in mathematics or the physical sciences. It is like them. Specifying the likeness in more detail, and deciding whether there is more likeness than unlikeness, are the kinds of tasks that legal reasoning is better adapted to do than mathematical or scientific reasoning.
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  14. Thinking like a lawyer.Dan Priel - manuscript
    Many legal theorists have argued that analogical reasoning is merely rule-following in which the general rule is not stated. Lloyd Weinreb's tries to defend the practice of analogical reasoning on its own terms. He does so by giving examples of the way people use analogical reasoning, both in legal and non-legal contexts, as a means for deciding how to act in particular circumstances. By itself such evidence does not support Weinreb's case, because to justify analogy he must show that analogical (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark