Comparing alternatives in the law

Artificial Intelligence and Law 12 (3):181-225 (2004)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

This paper argues the thesis that a particular style of reasoning, qualitative comparative reasoning (QCR), plays a role in at least three areas of legal reasoning that are central in AI and law research, namely legal theory construction, case-based reasoning in the form of case comparison, and legal proof. The paper gives an informal exposition of one particular way to deal with QCR, based on the author’s previous work on reason-based logic (RBL). Then it contains a substantially adapted formalisation of RBL, to make RBL suitable for dealing with QCR. The paper concludes with a brief discussion of related work.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,349

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
30 (#517,657)

6 months
3 (#1,023,809)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Jaap Hage
Leiden University

References found in this work

Taking rights seriously.Ronald Dworkin (ed.) - 1977 - London: Duckworth.
Law’s Empire.Ronald Dworkin - 1986 - Harvard University Press.
Freedom and reason.Richard Mervyn Hare - 1963 - Oxford,: Clarendon Press.
Taking Rights Seriously.Ronald Dworkin - 1979 - Mind 88 (350):305-309.

View all 24 references / Add more references