Legal argumentation : reasoned dissensus and common ground / edited by Eveline Feteris, Harm Kloosterhuis, and H. Jose Plug.

Format:

Book

Contributor:

Feteris, Eveline, editor.

Kloosterhuis, Harm, editor.

Plug, H. Jose, editor.

Language:

English

Subjects (All):

Forensic orations.

Law--Methodology.

Law.

Physical Description:

1 online resource (191 pages)

Edition:

First edition.

Place of Publication:

The Hague : Boom, [2024]

Summary:

This book explores the complex interplay between dissensus and consensus within legal argumentation. Edited by Eveline Feteris, Harm Kloosterhuis, H. José Plug, and Carel Smith, it features contributions from experts in law, argumentation theory, logic, and philosophy. The text examines how legal debates often begin with dissensus and aim for consensus, though these concepts are intertwined in practice. The book addresses themes such as the role of common ground in legal discourse, the influence of different reasoning methods like Bayesian analysis on judicial processes, and the importance of facts and evidence in legal debates. It serves as a valuable resource for legal scholars, judges, lawyers, and law students interested in the methodologies and epistemic virtues within legal argumentation. Generated by AI.

Contents:

Intro

Table of Contents

Preface

Introduction

Resolving dissensus

Does virtue deepen disagreement in law?

Legal interpretation and the risk account of scientific objectivity

What to do when experts disagree on judicial fact-finding?

The use of literary references in the justification of separate opinions

An introduction to the economic analysis of law as a legal theory in improving legal argumentation and judicial decision-making for IP law in Europe

Dissensus and the role of context

Contextual contingency of social rules

Defeasibility: a contextualist view

Consensus in concepts? A brief exploration

Fallacies concerning linguistic argumentation in law

Dissensus and evidence

Probability clerks and probability judges. Or how to prevent probabilistic fallacies in court

The virtue of being disagreeable. Identifying disagreement about legal evidence

Robust evidential probability and reasonable doubt

The pragmatics of evidence discourse: arguments from ostension

The function of dissensus

The Rule of Law and its procedural implications

Forensic rhetoric and conflict resolution. Enforcing agreements through emotion.

Notes:

Description based on publisher supplied metadata and other sources.

Part of the metadata in this record was created by AI, based on the text of the resource.

Description based on print version record.

Includes bibliographical references.

ISBN:

9789400114272

9400114273

OCLC:

1433204173