E contrario reasoning: The dilemma of the silent legislator
Argumentation 19 (4):485-496 (2005)
Abstract
This contribution offers an evaluation of e contrario reasoning in which the interpretation of a legal rule is based on the context of the law system . A model is presented which will show all the explicit and implicit elements of the argument at work and will also point out how these distinct parts are interrelated. By questioning the content and justificatory power of these elements, the weak spots in the argument can be laid bare. It will be argued that e contrario reasoning inevitably requires a dubious argumentative step, which renders the argument intrinsically weak. The model is applied to a European lawsuit on French cheeseAuthor's Profile
DOI
10.1007/s10503-005-0526-7
My notes
Similar books and articles
Studying Moral Reasoning in Business Settings: A New Methodological Approach.Elaine Mcgivern & James Weber - 2006 - Proceedings of the International Association for Business and Society 17:18-23.
Theistic Ethics and the Euthyphro Dilemma.Richard Joyce - 2002 - Journal of Religious Ethics 30 (1):49-75.
Newcomb's problem, prisoners' dilemma, and collective action.S. L. Hurley - 1991 - Synthese 86 (2):173 - 196.
Collective reasoning and the discursive dilemma.Kaarlo Miller - 2003 - Philosophical Explorations 6 (3):182 – 200.
Institutional context and auditors' moral reasoning: A canada-u.S. Comparison. [REVIEW]Linda Thorne, Dawn W. Massey & Michel Magnan - 2003 - Journal of Business Ethics 43 (4):305 - 321.
Analogical Reasoning and Easy Rescue Cases.Thomas Young - 1993 - Journal of Philosophical Research 18:327-339.
Silent Reading and Conceptual Confusion: A Wittgensteinian Approach.James Mcgray - 2013 - Journal of Philosophical Research 38:323-332.
Physicians' silent decisions: Because patient autonomy does not always come first.Simon N. Whitney & Laurence B. McCullough - 2007 - American Journal of Bioethics 7 (7):33 – 38.
The role of environmentalism : From the silent spring to the silent revolution.Gayil Talshir - 2004 - In M. L. J. Wissenburg & Yoram Levy (eds.), Liberal Democracy and Environmentalism: The End of Environmentalism? Routledge.
Moral realism, normative reasons, and rational intelligibility.Hallvard Lillehammer - 2002 - Erkenntnis 57 (1):47-69.
Analytics
Added to PP
2013-10-30
Downloads
64 (#188,263)
6 months
2 (#298,943)
2013-10-30
Downloads
64 (#188,263)
6 months
2 (#298,943)
Historical graph of downloads
Author's Profile
Citations of this work
Resources for Research on Analogy: A Multi-disciplinary Guide.Marcello Guarini, Amy Butchart, Paul Simard Smith & Andrei Moldovan - 2009 - Informal Logic 29 (2):84-197.
Handbook of Argumentation Theory.Frans Hendrik van Eemeren, Erik Bart Garssen, A. Francisca Snoeck Henkemans C. W. Krabbe, Jean Bart Verheij & H. M. Wagemans - 2014 - Dordrecht, Netherland: Springer.
On the Contrary: Inferential Analysis and Ontological Assumptions of the A Contrario Argument.Damiano Canale & Giovanni Tuzet - 2008 - Informal Logic 28 (1):31-43.
Argumentation Theory and the conception of epistemic justification.Lilian Bermejo-Luque - 2009 - In Marcin Koszowy (ed.), Informal Logic and Argumentation Theory. University of Białystok. pp. 285--303.
The Analysis and Evaluation of Legal Argumentation: Approaches from Legal Theory and Argumentation Theory.Eveline Feteris & Harm Klossterhuis - 2009 - Studies in Logic, Grammar and Rhetoric 16 (29).
References found in this work
Fundamentals of Legal Argumentation: A Survey of Theories on the Justification of Judicial Decisions.Eveline T. Feteris - 2017 - Dordrecht, Netherland: Springer Verlag.
A Theory of Legal Argumentation: The Theory of Rational Discourse as Theory of Legal Justification.Ruth Adler (ed.) - 1989 - Oxford University Press UK.
A Systematic Theory of Argumentation: The Pragma-Dialectical Approach.Frans Hendrik van Eemeren & Rob Grootendorst - 2003 - Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.