Law, Logic, Rhetoric: A Procedural Model of Legal Argumentation
نویسنده
چکیده
Legal argumentation can be modeled using logic, but in this chapter it is claimed that logic alone does not suffice. A model should also take the rhetoric nature of legal argumentation into account. DiaLaw is such a model: a formal, procedural model in which the logical and rhetorical aspects of argumentation are combined. The core of this chapter consists of a description of the basic concepts of DiaLaw and an extensive account of why rhetorical, non-logical elements of legal argumentation are essential.
منابع مشابه
Law as Rhetoric, Rhetoric as Argument
Many lawyers lack a basic understanding of the structure and process of legal argumentation. Their limited understanding, which often leads to less than effective advocacy, stems from legal education's failure to make the structure and process of legal argument explicit and systematic. One approach to this problem is to explore the intrinsic relationship of law to rhetoric. Because law and rhet...
متن کاملUsing Defeasible Logic Programming for Argumentation-Based Decision Support in Private Law
Legal reasoning is one of the most obvious application areas for computational models of argumentation as the exchange of arguments and counterarguments is the established means for making decisions in law. In this paper we employ Defeasible Logic Programming (DeLP) for representing legal cases and for giving decision-support, exemplary for private law. We give a formalization of legal provisio...
متن کاملSyllogism and Defeasibilty: A Comment on Neil MacCormick’s Rhetoric and the Rule of Law
This paper provides a review of Rhetoric and the Rule of Law, by Neil MacCormick, focussing on the role of logic in legal reasoning. In particular it considers the connection between syllogism, formal methods and rhetoric, and it distinguishes various aspects of legal defeasibility.
متن کاملProcedural Arguments
Although many authors claim that argumentation is a process, in most models the procedural side of argumentation is restricted to the definition of a procedural framework that is able to compare arguments. This paper elaborates on the procedural side of argumentation. A distinction is made between structural and procedural arguments. Structural arguments arecharacterizedbytheirspecificstructure...
متن کاملLaw and logic: A review from an argumentation perspective
This article reviews legal applications of logic, with a particularly marked concern for logical models of legal argument. We argue that the law is a rich test bed and important application field for logic-based AI research. First applications of logic to the representation of legal regulations are reviewed, where the main emphasis is on representation and where the legal conclusions follow fro...
متن کامل