Legal Argumentation Theory: Cross-Disciplinary Perspectives

1. Front Matter

   Pages i-xii

   PDF

2. Reasoning by Consequences: Applying Different Argumentation Structures to the Analysis of Consequentialist Reasoning in Judicial Decisions

   • Flavia Carbonell

   Pages 1-19

3. On the Argumentum ad Absurdum in Statutory Interpretation: Its Uses and Normative Significance

   • Thomas Bustamante

   Pages 21-43

4. Why Precedent in Law (and Elsewhere) Is Not Totally (or Even Substantially) About Analogy

   • Frederick Schauer

   Pages 45-56

5. Fallacies in Ad Hominem Arguments

   • Christian Dahlman, David Reidhav, Lena Wahlberg

   Pages 57-70

6. The Rule of Law and the Ideal of a Critical Discussion

   • Harm Kloosterhuis

   Pages 71-83

7. Strategic Maneuvering with the Argumentative Role of Legal Principles in the Case of the “Unworthy Spouse”

   • Eveline T. Feteris

   Pages 85-101

8. Legal Argumentation and the Normativity of Legal Norms

   • Carlos Bernal

   Pages 103-112

9. Weighing and Balancing in the Light of Deliberation and Expression

   • Bruce Anderson

   Pages 113-123

10. Construction or Reconstruction? On the Function of Argumentation in the Law

    • Jaap Hage

    Pages 125-143

11. The Argument from Psychological Typology for a Mild Separation Between the Context of Discovery and the Context of Justification

    • Marko Novak

    Pages 145-162

12. Constitutive Rules and Coherence in Legal Argumentation: The Case of Extensive and Restrictive Interpretation

    • Antonino Rotolo, Corrado Roversi

    Pages 163-188

13. Is Balancing a Method of Rational Justification sui generis?

    • Jan Sieckmann

    Pages 189-206

14. Arguing on Facts: Truth, Trials and Adversary Procedures

    • Giovanni Tuzet

    Pages 207-223

15. Back Matter

    Pages 225-233

    PDF

This book offers its readers an overview of recent developments in the theory of legal argumentation written by representatives from various disciplines, including argumentation theory, philosophy of law, logic and artificial intelligence. It presents an overview of contributions representative of different academic and legal cultures, and different continents and countries. The book contains contributions on strategic maneuvering, argumentum ad absurdum, argumentum ad hominem, consequentialist argumentation, weighing and balancing, the relation between legal argumentation and truth, the distinction between the context of discovery and context of justification, and the role of constitutive and regulative rules in legal argumentation. It is based on a selection of papers that were presented in the special workshop on Legal Argumentation organized at the 25th IVR World Congress for Philosophy of Law and Social Philosophy held 15-20 August 2011 in Frankfurt, Germany. 

• (Ir)rationality of Judicial Decision-Making
• Advocacy in Legal Argumentation
• Argumentation ad Absurdum
• Coherence in Legal Argumentation
• Fallacies in Arguments
• Kelsen Discovery and Justification
• Legal Argumentation
• Legal Argumentation and the Rule of Law
• Legal Interpretation and Argumentation
• Legal Methodology and Argumentaion
• Legal Philosophy and Argumentation
• Legal Rationality and Argumentation
• Pluralism, Proportionality and Process
• Pragma-Dialectical Perspective
• Rational Justification
• Reasoning by Consequences
• Strategic Maneuvering with Argumentation

From the book reviews:

“This collection of essays on legal argumentation theory should attract a broad audience of scholars from legal philosophy, argumentation, and logic. This book offers a broad range of theoretical essays that would be appropriate either as a textbook or for supplemental readings for an advanced level class on legal argumentation. … the volume should be useful and pertinent for theorists who study legal argumentation in those locations.” (Janice Schuetz, Journal of Argument in Context, Vol. 32 (2), 2014)

• , Faculty of Law, Lund University, Lund, Sweden

  Christian Dahlman

• Amsterdam, Netherlands

  Eveline Feteris

Policies and ethics