Informal Logic 28 (1):20-30 (2008)

Authors
Eveline Feteris
University of Amsterdam
Abstract
In legal theory, it is widely claimed that decisions in hard cases are based on weighing and balancing. However no reconstructions are given of the deep structure of the complex argumentation underlying the justification of these decisions. The author develops a model for the analysis of weighing and balancing of arguments in the justification of judicial decisions that are based on teleological-evaluative considerations. The justification is reconstructed as a complex argumentation that consists of different levels of argumentation and it is explained how these levels of argumentation relate to the burden of proof of a judge who gives a decision that is based on a weighing and balancing in which teleological-evaluative considerations are invoked
Keywords goal argumentation, pragmatic argumentation, rationality, teleological argumentation, weighing and balancing
Categories (categorize this paper)
Options
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: 65,714
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

The Nature of Rationality.Rober Nozick - 1993 - Princeton University Press.
The Nature of Rationality.Robert Nozick - 1995 - Journal des Economistes Et des Etudes Humaines 6 (1).

View all 17 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

On Argument Strength.Niki Pfeifer - 2013 - In Frank Zenker (ed.), Bayesian argumentation. The practical side of probability. Dordrecht, Netherlands: pp. 185-193.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Why Non-Monotonic Logic is Inadequate to Represent Balancing Arguments.Jan-R. Sieckmann - 2003 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 11 (2-3):211-219.
Jumps and Logic in the Law.Aleksander Peczenik - 1996 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 4 (3-4):297-329.
Formal Aspects of Legal Reasoning.A. Soeteman - 1995 - Argumentation 9 (5):731-746.
The Judicial Dialogue.Richard D. Rieke - 1991 - Argumentation 5 (1):39-55.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2013-11-24

Total views
39 ( #281,350 of 2,462,719 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
3 ( #223,459 of 2,462,719 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes