Ratio Juris 22 (4):499-509 (2009)

Damiano Canale
Università Commerciale Luigi Bocconi
The A Simili Argument draws the conclusion that a target case has a normative property Q since it shares a relevant property P with a source case. It can be seen as a complex inference constituted by three inferential steps: An abduction of the relevant property P , an induction of the class having that property, and a deduction of the target's having property Q . A major problem of this argument is the characterization of the property relevance. The standard answer refers to the notion of ratio: It is the ratio that fixes what is relevant for what. But the determination of the ratio is often a difficult and controversial task. This issue is considered here from an inferentialist point of view, claiming that the ratio and relevance are determined by the normative statuses reciprocally attributed by the speakers in the context of legal argumentation.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9337.2009.00437.x
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 51,756
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

The Concept of Law.Hla Hart - 1961 - Oxford University Press.
The Concept of Law.Stuart M. Brown - 1963 - Philosophical Review 72 (2):250.

View all 19 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

What the Legislature Did Not Say.Damiano Canale & Giovanni Tuzet - 2016 - Journal of Argumentation in Context 5 (3):249-270.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles


Added to PP index

Total views
27 ( #363,028 of 2,333,913 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #585,936 of 2,333,913 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes