Dialectical arguments and case comparison
نویسنده
چکیده
The basis of legal case-based reasoning is the doctrine of stare decisis: decisions in new cases should follow decisions in similar old cases. This paper takes as a starting point the ‘case comparison’ interpretation of the stare decisis doctrine. In this interpretation one establishes by case comparison which previously decided cases are sufficiently similar to a new case, after which the old conclusions are adopted in the new case. The paper shows how one can formally account for case comparison in terms of the dialectical arguments that cases give rise to. An innovation over previous work is that dialectical arguments are now formally defined, yielding a more transparent formal treatment of case comparison.
منابع مشابه
Cases and Dialectical Arguments - An Approach to Case-Based Reasoning
Case-based reasoning in the law is a reasoning strategy in which legal conclusions are supported by decisions made by judges. If the case at hand is analogous to a settled case, then by judicial authority one can argue that the settled case should be followed. Case-based reasoning is a topic where ontology meets logic since one’s conception of cases determines one’s conception of reasoning with...
متن کاملComputer-assisted safety argument review - a dialectics approach
There has been increasing use of argument-based approaches in the development of safetycritical systems. Within this approach, a safety case plays a key role in the system development life cycle. The key components in a safety case are safety arguments, which are designated to demonstrate that the system is acceptably safe. Inappropriate reasoning in safety arguments could undermine a system’s ...
متن کاملDesign for Supporting Dialectical Constructivist Learning Activities
Dialectical constructivism considers that the source of knowledge comes from constant and complex interactions between the evolving individual and the developing environment (Moshman, 1982). Dialectical constructivism informs dialectical learning pedagogy, where students constantly interact with each other in developing and refining arguments over an issue from multiple perspectives. With the a...
متن کاملComparison the Effectiveness of Dialectical Behavior Therapy, Drug Therapy and Their Combination Methods on Depression and Irrational Beliefs in Women with Postpartum Depression
Introduction: Postpartum depression is one of the most common postpartum mental disorders which usually associated with depression and irrational beliefs, so we should seek solutions to improve their psychological characteristics. The aim of research was comparison the effectiveness of dialectical behavior therapy, drug therapy and their combination methods on depression and irrational beliefs ...
متن کاملCOMPARISON OF THE EFFECTIVENESS OF HOLOGRAPHIC REPROCESSING AND DIALECTICAL BEHAVIORAL THERAPY ON AFFECTIVE CONTROL AND SOCIAL ADJUSTMENT IN DEPRESSIVE PATIENTS WITH ATTEMPTED SUICIDE
Background & Aims: Depression is the greatest psychological disorder of the present century, which is known as the common cold of psychiatry. And it is the most important risk factor for the suicide attempts. Therefore, this study aimed to compare the effectiveness of holographic reprocessing and dialectical behavioral therapy on affective control and social adjustment of depressed suicidal pat...
متن کامل