Order:
  1.  29
    Reconstructing Complex Analogy Argumentation in Judicial Decisions: A Pragma-Dialectical Perspective.Harm Kloosterhuis - 2005 - Argumentation 19 (4):471-483.
    Empirical research in the field of legal interpretation shows that, in many cases, analogy argumentation is complex rather than simple. Traditional analytical approaches to analogy argumentation do not explore that complexity. In most cases analogy argumentation is reconstructed as a simple form of argumentation that consists of two premises and a conclusion. This article focuses on the question of how to analyze and evaluate complex analogy argumentation. It is shown how the pragma-dialectical approach provides clues for analyzing complex analogy argumentation (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  2.  70
    Analogy Argumentation in Law: A Dialectical Perspective. [REVIEW]Harm Kloosterhuis - 2000 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 8 (2-3):173-187.
    In this paper I investigate the similarities betweenthe dialectical procedure in the pragma-dialecticaltheory and dialectical procedures in AI and Law. I dothis by focusing on one specific type of reasoning inlaw: analogy argumentation. I will argue that analogyargumentation is not only a heuristic forfinding new premises, but also a part of thejustification of legal decisions. The relevantcriteria for the evaluation of analogy argumentationare not to be found at the logical level of inference,but at the procedural level of the discussion. I (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  3.  20
    Damiano Canale and Giovanni Tuzet .The Rules of Inference. Inferentialism in Law and Philosophy. [REVIEW]Harm Kloosterhuis - 2014 - Journal of Argumentation in Context 3 (2):228-230.
  4.  26
    Henrique Jales Ribeiro : Systemic Approaches to Argument by Analogy.Harm Kloosterhuis - 2016 - Argumentation 30 (2):217-220.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  5. Institutional Constraints of Topical Strategic Maneuvering in Legal Argumentation. The Case of ‘Insulting’.Harm Kloosterhuis - 2015 - In Christian Dahlman & Thomas Bustamante (eds.), Argument Types and Fallacies in Legal Argumentation. Springer Verlag.
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  6.  3
    Presumptions and Burdens of Proof. An Anthology of Argumentation and the Law. Ed. By H. V. Hansen, F. J. Kauffeld, J. B. Freeman, and L. Bermejo-Luque. Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press, 2019. [REVIEW]Harm Kloosterhuis - forthcoming - Argumentation:1-3.
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  7.  31
    The Strategic Use of Formal Argumentation in Legal Decisions.Harm Kloosterhuis - 2008 - Ratio Juris 21 (4):496-506.
    In legal decisions standpoints can be supported by formal and also by substantive interpretative arguments. Formal arguments consist of reasons the weight or force of which is essentially dependent on the authoritativeness that the reasons may also have: In this connection one may think of linguistic and systemic arguments. On the other hand, substantive arguments are not backed up by authority, but consist of a direct invocation of moral, political, economic, or other social considerations. Formal arguments can be analyzed as (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark