Mimetics in judicial argumentation: A theoretical exploration

Abstract

To resolve a conflict of opinion regarding the past it is inevitable to present a reconstruction of that past, explicitly or implicitly. This we call the mimetic element. On an abstract level, a complete argumentation in the genus iudiciale requires a start that is mimetic and a follow-up that is diegetic. The question to be discussed is whether mimetic elements need to be formatted as sets of propositions and if so by whom.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 93,590

External links

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

Through your library

  • Only published works are available at libraries.

Analytics

Added to PP
2015-04-02

Downloads
6 (#711,559)

6 months
2 (#1,816,284)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

Add more citations

References found in this work

A grammar of motives.Kenneth Burke - 1969 - Berkeley,: University of California Press.
A Grammar of Motives.Max Black - 1946 - Philosophical Review 55 (4):487.
Law, Fact and Narrative Coherence.Bernard S. Jackson - 1988 - Liverpool: Deborah Charles Publications.
A Grammar of Motives.Abraham Kaplan - 1947 - Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 5 (3):233-234.

View all 7 references / Add more references