ISBN:
9783319161488
Language:
English
Pages:
1 online resource (230 pages)
Series Statement:
Law and Philosophy Library v.112
Parallel Title:
Erscheint auch als
DDC:
347.075
Keywords:
Forensic orations..
;
Law ; Methodology..
;
Semantics (Law)
;
Electronic books
;
Aufsatzsammlung
Abstract:
This book provides theoretical tools for evaluating the soundness of arguments in the context of legal argumentation. It deals with a number of general argument types and their particular use in legal argumentation. It provides detailed analyses of argument from authority, argument ad hominem, argument from ignorance, slippery slope argument and other general argument types. Each of these argument types can be used to construct arguments that are sound as well as arguments that are unsound. To evaluate an argument correctly one must be able to distinguish the sound instances of a certain argument type from its unsound instances. This book promotes the development of theoretical tools for this task.
Abstract:
Intro -- Contents -- About the Authors -- Introduction -- Part I: Argument Types or Fallacies? -- Chapter 1: Appeal to Expert Testimony - A Bayesian Approach -- 1.1 Introduction -- 1.2 The Problem with Trust -- 1.3 Expertology and Ad Hominem Arguments -- 1.4 Competence and Motivation -- 1.5 Bayes' Theorem and Arguments from Authority -- 1.6 Assessing Arguments that Question the Expert's Reliability -- 1.7 Conclusions -- References -- Chapter 2: Ad Hominem Fallacies and Epistemic Credibility -- 2.1 Introduction -- 2.2 Stereotype Threat and Implicit Bias -- 2.3 Epistemic Injustice -- 2.4 Fallacies in Dialogue: Bill and Sue -- 2.5 The Credibility of Female Attorneys -- 2.6 "Authentic" Victims and Credibility -- 2.7 Conclusion -- References -- Chapter 3: On the Absence of Evidence -- 3.1 Introduction -- 3.2 Absence of Evidence and Argumentation Theory -- 3.3 Absence of Evidence Is Not Evidence of Absence -- 3.4 Absence of Evidence, Burdens of Proof and Presumptions -- References -- Chapter 4: The Uses of Slippery Slope Argument -- 4.1 Varieties of Slippery Slope Argument -- 4.2 The Camel's Nose Is in the Sorites Tent -- 4.3 The Validity of Modus Ponens -- 4.4 The Soundness of the Argument -- 4.5 Conclusion: Preserving Vermeer's Authenticity -- References -- Chapter 5: Institutional Constraints of Topical Strategic Maneuvering in Legal Argumentation. The Case of 'Insulting' -- 5.1 Introduction -- 5.2 The Statutory Constraints of the Institutional Context -- 5.3 Constraints Developed in Case Law and Linguistic Constraints -- 5.4 Constraints Related to the Logic of Conversational Implicatures -- 5.5 Conclusion: The Constraints of Topical Strategic Maneuvering in Cases of Indirect Insulting -- References -- Chapter 6: One-Sided Argumentation in the Defense of Marriage Act -- 6.1 Case Background -- 6.1.1 Required Briefs -- 6.2 Amicus Curiae Briefs.
Note:
Description based on publisher supplied metadata and other sources
Permalink
