Law's Enterprise: Argumentation Schemes & Legal Analogy
نویسندگان
چکیده
منابع مشابه
Argumentation Corner A formalization of argumentation schemes for legal case-based reasoning in ASPIC+
In this article we offer a formal account of reasoning with legal cases in terms of argumentation schemes. These schemes, and undercutting attacks associated with them, are formalized as defeasible rules of inference within the ASPIC+ framework. We begin by modelling the style of reasoning with cases developed by Aleven and Ashley in the CATO project, which describes cases using factors, and th...
متن کاملArgumentation in Legal Reasoning
A popular view of what Artificial Intelligence can do for lawyers is that it can do no more than deduce the consequences from a precisely stated set of facts and legal rules. This immediately makes many lawyers sceptical about the usefulness of such systems: this mechanical approach seems to leave out most of what is important in legal reasoning. A case does not appear as a set of facts, but ra...
متن کاملArgumentation Schemes and Enthymemes
The aim of this investigation is to explore the role of argumentation schemes in enthymeme reconstruction. This aim is pursued by studying selected cases of incomplete arguments in natural language discourse to see what the requirements are for filling in the unstated premises and conclusions in some systematic and useful way. Some of these cases are best handled using deductive tools, while ot...
متن کاملApplications of Argumentation Schemes
Argumentation schemes capture common, stereotypical patterns of reasoning which are nondeductive and nonmonotonic. As interest in understanding these schemes from a theoretical point of view grows, so too does an awareness within computational work that these schemes might yield powerful techniques in a range of domains. This paper aims to perform two functions. First, to briefly review the lit...
متن کاملInterpretative Argumentation Schemes
Tarello (1980) identified fifteen kinds of arguments used for statutory interpretation, and later, MacCormick and Summers (1991) recognized eleven types of interpretive arguments. Building on this work, the aim of this paper, part of a wider research project, is to formulate argumentation schemes for statutory interpretation. To indicate the direction of this work, an example of one of the sche...
متن کاملذخیره در منابع من
با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید
ژورنال
عنوان ژورنال: SSRN Electronic Journal
سال: 2018
ISSN: 1556-5068
DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.3205907