3 edition of Logical models of legal argumentation found in the catalog.
|Other titles||Artificial intelligence and law.|
|Statement||edited by Henry Prakken and Giovanni Sartor.|
|Contributions||Prakken, Henry., Sartor, Giovanni.|
|LC Classifications||K213 .L633 1997|
|The Physical Object|
|Pagination||212 p. :|
|Number of Pages||212|
|LC Control Number||96053465|
Logical validity and acceptability of legal argumentation 26 Various logical theories 28 Logical analysis of legal argumentation 32 The discussion of the importance of logic for legal argumentation 34 Conclusion Logic Argumentation Books Showing of 28 An Introduction to Probability and Inductive Logic (Paperback) by. Ian Hacking (shelved 1 time as logic-argumentation) avg rating — ratings — published Want to Read saving Want to Read.
"In his new book The Tools of Argument: How the Best Lawyers Think, Argue, and Win, Professor Joel Trachtman lays out the many intricacies related to how lawyers frame is a masterly treatment of a complex and compelling set of issues. There is much to learn here, both for the experienced practitioner and for the novice to the field."Reviews: When adopting a sound logical system, reasonings made within this system are correct. The situation with reasonings expressed, at least in part, with natural language is much more ambiguous. One way.
A Theory of Legal Argumentation book. Read 2 reviews from the world's largest community for readers. What is meant by the term rational legal argument? /5(2). Early systems for legal argumentation In this section we brieﬂy discuss some early landmark systems for legal argumenta-tion. All of them concern the construction of arguments and counterarguments. Conﬂicting interpretations Systems to address conﬂicting interpretations of legal concepts go back to the very beginnings of AI and Law.
In the study of forms of legal reasoning, logic and argumentation theory long followed separate tracks. `Legal logicians' tended to focus on a deductive reconstruction of justifying a decision, disreg. Get BEST PRICE AT AXTON BOOKS on Logical Models Of Legal Argumentation - By Henry Prakken, Giovanni Sartor - - (Springer Netherlands) - In the study of forms of legal reasoning, logic and argumentation theory long fo.
A model of argumentation and its application to legal reasoning / Kathleen Freeman, Arthur M. Farley --A theory of legal reasoning and a logic to match / Jaap Hage --Abstract argumentation / Robert A. Kowalski, Francesca Toni --Jumps and logic in the law / Aleksander Peczenik --A dialectical model of assessing conflicting arguments in legal.
Thus the prospect is emerging of an integrated logical and dialectical account of legal argument, adding to the understanding of legal reasoning, and providing a formal basis for computer tools that assist and mediate legal debates while leaving room for human initiative.
This book. Logical Models of Legal Argumentation. Find all books from Prakken, H. / Sartor, Giovanni (Hgg.). At you can find used, antique and new books, compare results and immediately purchase your selection at the best price.
In the study Logical models of legal argumentation book forms of legal reasoning, logic. A leading expert in informal logic, Douglas Walton turns his attention in this new book to how reasoning operates in trials and other legal contexts, with special emphasis on the law of evidence.
The new model he develops, drawing on methods of argumentation theory that are gaining wide acceptance in computing fields like artificial intelligence, can be used to identify, analyze, and evaluate Author: Douglas Walton.
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.
In AI & law research, the notion of legal argument had been central since its very beginning, but with the development in general AI of logical argumentation frameworks such as, and this work could be given logical foundations. In the next section we review this work on logical models of legal argument.
This handbook addresses legal reasoning and argumentation from a logical, philosophical and legal perspective. The main forms of legal reasoning and argumentation are covered in an exhaustive and critical fashion, and are analysed in connection with more general types (and problems) of reasoning.
This book is a revised and extended version of my PhD Thesis 'Logical Tools for Modelling Legal Argument', which I defended on 14 January at the Free. Rhetorical Argumentation: Principles of Theory and Practice approaches argumentation from a rhetorical point of view and demonstrates how logical and dialectical considerations depend on the rhetorical features of the argumentative situation.
Throughout this text, author Christopher W. Tindale identifies how argumentation as a communicative. legal problems Although traditional logic captures part of legal reasoning, it does not address the most difficult parts, and so its study may not be particularly critical for lawyers.
If we had a truly useful theory of legal reasoning, we would surely place it at the center of our legal curriculum. T1 - Logical Models of Legal Argumentation.
AU - Prakken, H. AU - Sartor, G. PY - Y1 - M3 - Article. VL - 4. JO - Artificial Intelligence and Law. JF - Artificial Intelligence and Law. SN - ER - Prakken H, Sartor G. Logical Models of Legal Argumentation. Get this from a library. Logical Models of Legal Argumentation. [Henry Prakken; Giovanni Sartor] -- In the study of forms of legal reasoning, logic and argumentation theory long followed separate tracks.
`Legal logicians' tended to focus on a deductive reconstruction of justifying a decision. Argumentation theory, or argumentation, is the interdisciplinary study of how conclusions can be reached through logical reasoning; that is, claims based, soundly or not, on includes the arts and sciences of civil debate, dialogue, conversation, and studies rules of inference, logic, and procedural rules in both artificial and real world settings.
A logical argument is the use of informal logic in a natural language to support a claim or conclusion. This should not be viewed as a magical path to truth and validity as logic can suffer from problems such as invalid data, disputable premises, fallacies and neglect of grey following are illustrative examples of a logical argument.
Prakken, Logical Tools for Modelling Legal Argument. A Study of Defeasible Reasoning in Law. Kluwer Law and Philosophy Library, Dordrecht etc, [Ordering information] [Chinese translation ] H. Prakken & G.
Sartor (eds.), Logical Models of Legal Argumentation. Kluwer, Dordrecht etc, [Ordering information]. The Toulmin model (or system) is a six-part model of argument (with similarities to the syllogism) introduced by British philosopher Stephen Toulmin in his book The Uses of Argument.
The Toulmin model (or "system") can be used as a tool for developing, analyzing, and categorizing arguments. Logical Argument - 6 Conjunction Any two propositions P and Q can be conjoined, producing the proposition: P and Q Example: “I am late and you are late” is a combination that means both of us are late.
The proposition P and Q is true only when both P and Q are true. Otherwise, it is false. Assignment Tip 2: Good arguments •Good legal writing and advocacy depends on presenting a well structured argument. –This applies whether you are writing an essay, arguing before a judge, advising a client, conducting negotiations or offering a legal opinion.
•A good legal argument must be carefully organised and effectively presented. In informal logic and philosophy, an argument map or argument diagram is a visual representation of the structure of an argument map typically includes the key components of the argument, traditionally called the conclusion and the premises, also called contention and reasons.
Argument maps can also show co-premises, objections, counterarguments, rebuttals, and lemmas. 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. A few well known methods of reasoning. Critical Thinking is a process of rational thought that seeks to draw conclusions in an objective, thorough and informed manner.
It's a product of human thought and is influenced by factors such as culture and language.