LEADER 04416nam a22005775i 4500
001 810174
003 TR_AnAIT
005 20260131021008
007 cr nn 008mamaa
008 121227s1997 ne | s |||| 0|eng d
020 |a9789401156684|9978-94-011-5668-4
024 7 |a10.1007/978-94-011-5668-4|2doi
041 |aeng
049 |aTürk Tarih Kurumu Kütüphanesi
050 4|aK201-487
050 4|aK140-165
072 7|aLAB|2bicssc
072 7|aLAW000000|2bisacsh
072 7|aLAB|2thema
082 04|a340.1|223
090 |aDK/11456
245 10|aLogical Models of Legal Argumentation|h[electronic resource] /|cedited by H. Prakken, Giovanni Sartor.
250 |a1st ed. 1997.
264 1|aDordrecht :|bSpringer Netherlands :|bImprint: Springer,|c1997.
300 |aIII, 216 p.|bonline resource.
336 |atext|btxt|2rdacontent
337 |acomputer|bc|2rdamedia
338 |aonline resource|bcr|2rdacarrier
347 |atext file|bPDF|2rda
505 0 |aEditors’ Introduction -- A Model of Argumentation and Its Application to Legal Reasoning -- A Theory of Legal Reasoning and a Logic to Match -- Abstract Argumentation -- Jumps and Logic in the Law -- A Dialectical Model of Assessing Conflicting Arguments in Legal Reasoning.
520 |aIn the study of forms of legal reasoning, logic and argumentation theory long followed separate tracks. `Legal logicians' tended to focus on a deductive reconstruction of justifying a decision, disregarding the dialectical process leading to the chosen justification. Others instead emphasized the adversarial and discretionary nature of legal reasoning, involving reasonable evaluation of alternative choices, and the use of analogical reasoning. Recently, however, developments in Artificial Intelligence and Law have paved the way for overcoming this separation. Logic has widened its scope to defensible argumentation, and informal accounts of analogy and dialectics have inspired the construction of computer programs. Thus the prospect is emerging of an integrated logical and dialectical account of legal argument, adding to the understanding of legal reasoning, and providing a formal basis for computer tools that assist and mediate legal debates while leaving room for human initiative. This book presents contributions to this development. From a logical point of view it covers topics such as evaluating conflicting arguments, weighing reasons, modelling legal disputes as a dialogue game, the role of the burden of proof, the relation between principles, rules, reasons and facts, and the relation between deductive and nondeductive arguments. Written by leading scholars in the field and building on recent developments in logic and Artificial Intelligence, the chapters provide a state-of-the-art account of research on the logical aspects of legal argument.
532 8 |aAccessibility summary: This PDF is not accessible. It is based on scanned pages and does not support features such as screen reader compatibility or described non-text content (images, graphs etc). However, it likely supports searchable and selectable text based on OCR (Optical Character Recognition). Users with accessibility needs may not be able to use this content effectively. Please contact us at accessibilitysupport@springernature.com if you require assistance or an alternative format.
532 8 |aInaccessible, or known limited accessibility
532 8 |aNo reading system accessibility options actively disabled
532 8 |aPublisher contact for further accessibility information: accessibilitysupport@springernature.com
650 0|aLaw|xPhilosophy.
650 0|aLaw|xHistory.
650 0|aLogic.
650 14|aTheories of Law, Philosophy of Law, Legal History.
650 24|aLogic.
650 24|aPhilosophy of Law.
700 1 |aPrakken, H.|eeditor.|4edt|4http://id.loc.gov/vocabulary/relators/edt
700 1 |aSartor, Giovanni.|eeditor.|4edt|4http://id.loc.gov/vocabulary/relators/edt
710 2 |aSpringerLink (Online service)
773 0 |tSpringer Nature eBook
776 08|iPrinted edition:|z9780792344131
776 08|iPrinted edition:|z9789401156691
776 08|iPrinted edition:|z9789401063906
856 40|uhttps://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-5668-4
912 |aZDB-2-SHU
912 |aZDB-2-SXLC
912 |aZDB-2-BAE
950 |aHumanities, Social Sciences and Law (SpringerNature-11648)
950 |aLaw and Criminology (R0) (SpringerNature-43727)