Mimetics in judicial argumentation: A theoretical exploration

Abstract

To resolve a conflict of opinion regarding the past it is inevitable to present a reconstruction of that past, explicitly or implicitly. This we call the mimetic element. On an abstract level, a complete argumentation in the genus iudiciale requires a start that is mimetic and a follow-up that is diegetic. The question to be discussed is whether mimetic elements need to be formatted as sets of propositions and if so by whom.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 101,010

External links

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

Through your library

  • Only published works are available at libraries.

Analytics

Added to PP
2015-04-02

Downloads
10 (#1,469,896)

6 months
4 (#1,247,585)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

Add more citations

References found in this work

A grammar of motives.Kenneth Burke - 1969 - Berkeley,: University of California Press.
A Grammar of Motives.Max Black - 1946 - Philosophical Review 55 (4):487.
Law, Fact and Narrative Coherence.Bernard S. Jackson - 1988 - Liverpool: Deborah Charles Publications.
A Grammar of Motives.Abraham Kaplan - 1947 - Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 5 (3):233-234.

View all 7 references / Add more references