Jumps and logic in the law

Artificial Intelligence and Law 4 (3-4):297-329 (1996)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The main stream of legal theory tends to incorporate unwritten principles into the law. Weighing of principles plays a great role in legal argumentation, inter alia in statutory interpretation. A weighing and balancing of principles and other prima facie reasons is a jump. The inference is not conclusive.To deal with defeasibility and weighing, a jurist needs both the belief-revision logic and the nonmonotonic logic. The systems of nonmonotonic logic included in the present volume provide logical tools enabling one to speak precisely about various kinds of rules about rules, dealing with such things as applicability of rules, what is assumed by rules, priority between rules and the burden of proof. Nonmonotonic logic is an example of an extension of the domain of logic. But the more far-reaching the extension is, the greater problems it meets. It seems impossible to make logical reconstruction of the totality of legal argumentation.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 100,063

External links

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

Through your library

Similar books and articles

A theory of legal reasoning and a logic to match.Jaap Hage - 1996 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 4 (3):199-273.
The pleadings game.Thomas F. Gordon - 1993 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 2 (4):239-292.
Rules, principles, and Defeasibility.Manuel Atienza & Juan Ruiz Manero - 2012 - In Jordi Ferrer Beltrán & Giovanni Battista Ratti (eds.), The Logic of Legal Requirements: Essays on Defeasibility. Oxford, U.K.: Oxford University Press.
The modular logic of private international law.Phan Minh Dung & Giovanni Sartor - 2011 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 19 (2-3):233-261.
Abstract argumentation.Robert A. Kowalski & Francesca Toni - 1996 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 4 (3-4):275-296.
Defeasibility in Law.Giovanni Sartor - 2011 - In Colin Aitken, Amalia Amaya, Kevin D. Ashley, Carla Bagnoli, Giorgio Bongiovanni, Bartosz Brożek, Cristiano Castelfranchi, Samuele Chilovi, Marcello Di Bello, Jaap Hage, Kenneth Einar Himma, Lewis A. Kornhauser, Emiliano Lorini, Fabrizio Macagno, Andrei Marmor, J. J. Moreso, Veronica Rodriguez-Blanco, Antonino Rotolo, Giovanni Sartor, Burkhard Schafer, Chiara Valentini, Bart Verheij, Douglas Walton & Wojciech Załuski (eds.), Handbook of Legal Reasoning and Argumentation. Dordrecht, Netherland: Springer Verlag. pp. 315-364.
Defeasible Deontic Logic.Donald Nute (ed.) - 1997 - Dordrecht, Boston, and London: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Resource-origins of Nonmonotonicity.Dov Gabbay & John Woods - 2008 - Studia Logica 88 (1):85-112.

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
97 (#215,094)

6 months
9 (#454,186)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

A formal model of adjudication dialogues.Henry Prakken - 2008 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 16 (3):305-328.
Reasoning with Factors.Giovanni Sartor - 2005 - Argumentation 19 (4):417-432.
Law, logic, rhetoric: A procedural model of legal argumentation.Arno R. Lodder - 2004 - In S. Rahman (ed.), Logic, Epistemology, and the Unity of Science. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers. pp. 569--588.

View all 7 citations / Add more citations

References found in this work

The Structure of Scientific Revolutions.Thomas S. Kuhn - 1962 - Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Edited by Ian Hacking.
The Structure of Scientific Revolutions.Thomas Samuel Kuhn - 1962 - Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Edited by Otto Neurath.
The logic of scientific discovery.Karl Raimund Popper - 1934 - New York: Routledge. Edited by Hutchinson Publishing Group.

View all 42 references / Add more references