- New
-
Topics
- All Categories
- Metaphysics and Epistemology
- Value Theory
- Science, Logic, and Mathematics
- Science, Logic, and Mathematics
- Logic and Philosophy of Logic
- Philosophy of Biology
- Philosophy of Cognitive Science
- Philosophy of Computing and Information
- Philosophy of Mathematics
- Philosophy of Physical Science
- Philosophy of Social Science
- Philosophy of Probability
- General Philosophy of Science
- Philosophy of Science, Misc
- History of Western Philosophy
- Philosophical Traditions
- Philosophy, Misc
- Other Academic Areas
- Journals
- Submit material
- More
The missing link revisited: The role of teleology in representing legal argument [Book Review]
Artificial Intelligence and Law 10 (1):79-94 (2002)
Abstract
In this paper I recapitulate the ideas of Berman and Hafner (1993) regarding the role of teleology in legal argument. I show how these ideas can be used to address some issues arising from more recent work on legal argument, and how this relates to ideas associated with the New Rhetoric of Perelman. I illustrate the points with a discussion of the classic problem of which vehicles should be allowed in parks.Other Versions
No versions found
My notes
Similar books and articles
Introduction: Dialectical legal argument: Formal and informal models. [REVIEW]Eveline Feteris & Henry Prakken - 2000 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 8 (2):107-113.
George C. Christie, the notion of an ideal audience in legal argument.Trevor J. M. Bench-Capon - 2001 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 9 (1):59-71.
Henry Prakken (1997). Logical tools for modelling legal argument. A study of defeasible reasoning in law.Bart Verheij - 2000 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 8 (1):35-65.
Legal logic? Or can we do without?Arend Soeteman - 2003 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 11 (2):197-210.
Christopher W. Tindale, acts of arguing, a rhetorical model of argument.Arno R. Lodder - 2001 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 9 (1):73-78.
Argument construction and reinstatement in logics for defeasible reasoning.John F. Horty - 2001 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 9 (1):1-28.
Editor's introduction: Special issue in memory of Donald H. Berman. [REVIEW]Carole D. Hafner & Edwina L. Rissland - 2002 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 10 (1):3-6.
Douglas Walton, the new dialectic. Conversational contexts of argument. Toronto: University of toronto press (book review). [REVIEW]Bart Verheij - 2001 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 9 (4):305-313.
The bayesianism debate in legal scholarship.Ephraim Nissan - 2001 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 9 (2):199-214.
Introduction: Agents and norms: How to fill the gap? [REVIEW]Rosaria Conte, Rino Falcone & Giovanni Sartor - 1999 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 7 (1):1-15.
Analytics
Added to PP
2009-01-28
Downloads
127 (#358,552)
6 months
12 (#969,130)
2009-01-28
Downloads
127 (#358,552)
6 months
12 (#969,130)
Historical graph of downloads
Citations of this work
A model of legal reasoning with cases incorporating theories and values.Trevor Bench-Capon & Giovanni Sartor - 2003 - Artificial Intelligence 150 (1-2):97-143.
Reasoning with dimensions and magnitudes.John Horty - 2019 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 27 (3):309-345.
Law and logic: A review from an argumentation perspective.Henry Prakken & Giovanni Sartor - 2015 - Artificial Intelligence 227 (C):214-245.
HYPO's legacy: introduction to the virtual special issue.T. J. M. Bench-Capon - 2017 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 25 (2):205-250.
Representing dimensions within the reason model of precedent.Adam Rigoni - 2018 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 26 (1):1-22.
References found in this work
The New Rhetoric: A Treatise on Argumentation.Ch Perelman, L. Olbrechts-Tyteca, John Wilkinson & Purcell Weaver - 1969 - Philosophy and Rhetoric 3 (4):249-254.
The New Rhetoric: A Treatise on Argumentation.Chaïm Perelman & Lucie Olbrechts-Tyteca - 1969 - Notre Dame, IN, USA: Notre Dame University Press. Edited by Lucie Olbrechts-Tyteca.
Justice, Law, and Argument: Essays on Moral and Legal Reasoning.Ch Perelman - 1980 - Dordrecht and Boston: Reidel.
Try MATCHA Writer if you're interested in citing directly from PhilPapers and certifying your authorship.
This site uses cookies and Google Analytics (see our terms & conditions for details regarding the privacy implications). Use of this site is subject to terms & conditions.
All rights reserved by The PhilPapers Foundation