The rational reconstruction of argumentation referring to consequences and purposes in the application of legal rules: A pragma-dialectical perspective

Argumentation 19 (4):459-470 (2005)

Authors
Eveline Feteris
University of Amsterdam
Abstract
In this paper, the author develops an instrument for the rational reconstruction of argumentation in which a judicial decision is justified by referring to the consequences in relation to the purpose of the rule. The instrument is developed by integrating insights from legal theory and legal philosophy about the function and use of arguments from consequences in relation to the purpose of a rule into a pragma-dialectical framework. Then, by applying the instrument to the analysis of examples from legal practice, it is demonstrated that the instrument can offer a heuristic and critical tool for the analysis and evaluation of legal argumentation that can ‘bridge’ the gap between more abstract discussions of forms of legal argumentation on the one hand, and legal arguments as they occur in actual legal practice on the other hand
Keywords consequentialist argumentation  legal argumentation  legal interpretation  legal reasoning  teleological interpretation
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1007/s10503-005-0512-0
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

Our Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 43,914
External links

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

Law's Empire.R. DWORKIN - 1986 - Harvard University Press.
The Nature of Rationality.Robert Nozick - 1993 - Princeton University Press.

View all 11 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Eveline T. Feteris: Fundamentals of Legal Argumentation.T. J. M. Bench-Capon - 2018 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 26 (3):307-314.

View all 10 citations / Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Analogy Argumentation in Law: A Dialectical Perspective. [REVIEW]Harm Kloosterhuis - 2000 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 8 (2-3):173-187.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2013-10-30

Total views
27 ( #319,840 of 2,266,402 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
5 ( #281,757 of 2,266,402 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes

Sign in to use this feature