Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Henry Prakken (1997). Logical Tools for Modelling Legal Argument. A Study of Defeasible Reasoning in Law

Henry Prakken (1997). Logical Tools for Modelling Legal Argument. A Study of Defeasible Reasoning... 36 BOOK REVIEW of comments on Prakken’s theory of defeasible argumentation. The comments are meant as a contribution to the ongoing discussion on the nature of defeasible argumentation in the law, and its formalization. Part I: Prakken’s Book on the Formalization of Legal Argumentation 2. Logic and Law The central message of Prakken’s book, with which I wholeheartedly agree, is that the role of logic in law can be strengthened. The fact that a connection between logic and law exists does not come as a surprise: logic has reasoning as its topic, and in law, reasoning is one of the main activities. There is a difference in focus: a central question of logic is what valid reasoning is, while the law is primarily interested in persuasive reasoning. An im- portant bridge between logic and law is the fact that both in logic and in law formal aspects of reasoning receive special attention. ‘Formal’ is meant in a literal sense here: determined by form, according to a pattern. The logician thinks of following Modus ponens .P;P ! Q=Q/, the lawyer of applying a rule of law to the case facts. Of course the role of the formal aspects of reasoning http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Artificial Intelligence and Law Springer Journals

Henry Prakken (1997). Logical Tools for Modelling Legal Argument. A Study of Defeasible Reasoning in Law

Artificial Intelligence and Law , Volume 8 (1) – Oct 3, 2004

Loading next page...
 
/lp/springer-journals/henry-prakken-1997-logical-tools-for-modelling-legal-argument-a-study-MEuuN6j5KW
Publisher
Springer Journals
Copyright
Copyright © 2000 by Kluwer Academic Publishers
Subject
Computer Science; Artificial Intelligence (incl. Robotics); International IT and Media Law, Intellectual Property Law; Philosophy of Law; Legal Aspects of Computing; Information Storage and Retrieval
ISSN
0924-8463
eISSN
1572-8382
DOI
10.1023/A:1008318016098
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

36 BOOK REVIEW of comments on Prakken’s theory of defeasible argumentation. The comments are meant as a contribution to the ongoing discussion on the nature of defeasible argumentation in the law, and its formalization. Part I: Prakken’s Book on the Formalization of Legal Argumentation 2. Logic and Law The central message of Prakken’s book, with which I wholeheartedly agree, is that the role of logic in law can be strengthened. The fact that a connection between logic and law exists does not come as a surprise: logic has reasoning as its topic, and in law, reasoning is one of the main activities. There is a difference in focus: a central question of logic is what valid reasoning is, while the law is primarily interested in persuasive reasoning. An im- portant bridge between logic and law is the fact that both in logic and in law formal aspects of reasoning receive special attention. ‘Formal’ is meant in a literal sense here: determined by form, according to a pattern. The logician thinks of following Modus ponens .P;P ! Q=Q/, the lawyer of applying a rule of law to the case facts. Of course the role of the formal aspects of reasoning

Journal

Artificial Intelligence and LawSpringer Journals

Published: Oct 3, 2004

References