scholarly journals Dialectical Approach to Legal Arguing and Legal Argumentation

2021 ◽  
pp. 145-165
Author(s):  
Tamara Dudash
Keyword(s):  
Theoretical Model ◽  
Legal Reasoning ◽  
Critical Discussion ◽  
Legal Argumentation ◽  
Dialectical Approach ◽  
Context Of Justification ◽  
Specific Standard ◽  
Characteristic Features ◽  
Rational Communication

The article is devoted to legal argumentation, namely to its research by dialectical approach. The aim of the article is to determine characteristic features of dialectical approach to legal argumentation. Dialectical approach to the research of legal argumentation should include philosophical, theoretical, empirical components. Philosophical component of legal argumentation research consists in the critical conception of rationality i.e. the philosophical axiomatic idea about rationality of legal argumentation, which is systematically tested within discourse or critical discussion. Dialectical theoretical model of legal argumentation ensures mutual acceptability of legal argumentation by the parties. Dialectical approach deals with legal argumentation mainly in the “context of justification.” Dialectical approach to legal arguing implies specific standard of soundness of the argumentation – acceptability standard. Empirical component of legal argumentation includes reconstruction of argumentation and its weighting (analytic component) as well as analysis of particular legal reasoning (practical component). Dialectical approach highlights hermeneutical nature of legal reasoning. Dialectical approach to legal argumentation lets us assume some ontological issues concerning legal argumentation. Legal argumentation is considered as the form of rational communication of particular persons to reach mutual acceptability of legally important conclusions within the procedure of discussion. Legal argumentation is the result of such impact embodied in acceptability of legally binding issues within the procedure of rational discussion.

scholarly journals A Pragma-Dialectical Approach to Political Discourse Analysis: A Case Study of the Former United State Trade Representative Ron Kirk’s Remarks on the Poultry Case

2016 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 53
Author(s):  
Shi Wen
Keyword(s):  
Discourse Analysis ◽  
Political Discourse ◽  
Critical Evaluation ◽  
Critical Discussion ◽  
Background Information ◽  
The Political ◽  
United State ◽  
Dialectical Approach ◽  
Political Discourse Analysis

<p align="LEFT">Under the research framework of Pragma-</p><p align="LEFT">Dialectics, this paper analyses and evaluates the</p><p align="LEFT">former United State trade representative Ron</p><p align="LEFT">Kirk’s remarks on the trade conflict of poultry.</p><p align="LEFT">Through this case study, I intend to develop a</p><p align="LEFT">pragma-dialectical approach to the political</p><p align="LEFT">discourse. Based on the argumentative</p><p align="LEFT">reconstruction, strategic maneuvering analysis</p><p align="LEFT">and critical evaluation of the remarks, this</p><p align="LEFT">paper finds that even if Ron Kirk’s remarks look</p><p align="LEFT">reasonable apparently, there are still some</p><p align="LEFT">fallacies hidden in them. In order to make the</p><p align="LEFT">US government benefit most from the trade</p><p align="LEFT">conflict, after considering comprehensively of</p><p align="LEFT">the potential topics, audience demands, and</p><p align="LEFT">presentational devices, Ron Kirk maneuvers</p><p align="LEFT">strategically by choosing beneficial starting</p><p>points and arranging argumentative schemes</p><p align="LEFT">technically. By doing so, he can transmit Anti-</p><p align="LEFT">China ideology to the international society</p><p align="LEFT">imperceptibly. In addition, by taking into</p><p align="LEFT">consideration the background information of</p><p align="LEFT">the poultry case and the Ten Commandments of</p><p align="LEFT">a critical discussion, this paper reveals that, the</p><p align="LEFT">accepted starting points and the argument</p><p align="LEFT">schemes are abused in Ron Kirk’s remarks.</p><p align="LEFT">Through the case study, this paper tries to study</p><p align="LEFT">political discourse from Pragma-Dialectical</p><p align="LEFT">approach and provide feasible analytical</p><p align="LEFT">methods and reasonable evaluative standards</p><p align="LEFT">for the political discourse analysis, so that a</p><p align="LEFT">new perspective will be offered for researches</p><p>on political discourse.</p>

Argumenty i rozumowania prawnicze w konstytucyjnym państwie prawa: Komentarz

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrzej Grabowski
Keyword(s):  
Latin American ◽  
Interdisciplinary Research ◽  
Constitutional Law ◽  
Legal Theory ◽  
Legal Reasoning ◽  
Legal Argumentation ◽  
Norms And Values ◽  
Legal Arguments ◽  
Latin American Countries

LEGAL ARGUMENTS AND REASONING IN THE CONSTITUTIONAL LAW-GOVERNED STATE: THE COMMENTARY The interdisciplinary research on legal argumentation presented in this volume, entitled Legal Arguments and Reasoning in the Constitutional Law-governed State: The Commentary (edited by Monika Florczak-Wątor and Andrzej Grabowski), is primarily inspired by the theory of constitutional law-governed state developed in Italy, Spain, and Latin American countries, by scholars proposing doctrines of positivist or postpositivist constitutionalism and neoconstitutionalism. As explained by Andrzej Grabowski in the “Introduction” [pp. 23–29], the theory is focused first and foremost on legal reasoning as it is conducted in the process of judicial law application and with particular stress on how it is affected by constitutional norms and values. Legal theory on its own does not seem to possess sufficient means to examine legal reasoning in constitutional law-governed states adequately—such an endeavour might be done far better with the help of dogmatics of constitutional law. Hence, this commentary on 91 arguments, topoi, and legal reasoning schemata result from the research team’s joint efforts composed of 18 legal theorists and constitutionalists.

Evolutionary approach in reasoning practice of constitutional justice

2020 ◽  
Vol 29 (6) ◽  
pp. 115-140
Author(s):  
Aleksandra Uroshleva
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Legal Reasoning ◽  
The United States ◽  
Subject Area ◽  
Evolutionary Approach ◽  
Constitutional Review ◽  
Living Tree ◽  
Constitutional Justice ◽  
Characteristic Features ◽  
Evolutionary Interpretation

The author examines the essence and characteristic features of the evolutionary interpretation in constitutional review bodies decisions and concludes given the relationship between processes of argumentation and interpretation, as well as definite characteristics and trends in the application of the evolutionary interpretation in different countries, that it is more appropriate to talk about the evolutionary approach in argumentation, not about a separate method of interpretation. An evolutionary constitutional interpretation, as it is stated in the article, does not necessarily mean going beyond the literal text of the basic law. A literal (textual) interpretation and an evolutionary approach are combined phenomena of different nature; they are allocated based on various criteria – the source (orientation on the text) and the socially adaptive result, respectively. The value of the evolutionary approach is associated with the possibility of “adjusting” constitutional norms to real social canvas without making changes to the text of a constitution. The author shows using the case law examples that an evolutionary interpretation can be expansive, that is aimed at increasing the scope of constitutional regulation (“filling” constitutional norms with “new” (additional) content, picking out new human rights, increasing their level of protection), and restrictive, that is narrowing the scope regulated and (or) protected by a constitution (reducing level of human rights guarantees or subject area of constitutional regulation). Considering through the prism of specific constitutional justice cases such doctrines as of a “living constitution” in the United States of America, a “living tree” in Canada and the concept of “judicial law development” in Germany, the author comes to the conclusion that an independent concept of the evolutionary approach in legal reasoning has not been formed yet in the Russian practice of constitutional justice. In this regard, it seems to be perspective direction to develop such a concept, especially in the context of a possibility of combining the evolutionary approach with original interpretation. It seems that despite the fact that the problem of judicial activism is not now a problem of current urgent interest in Russia, the constitutional amendments of 2020 have actualized the potential for an evolutionary interpretation of certain constitutional provisions.

scholarly journals Taking the dialectical stance in reasoning with evidence and proof

2018 ◽  
Vol 23 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 90-99 ◽  
Author(s):  
Floris J Bex ◽  
Douglas N Walton
Keyword(s):  
Hybrid Approach ◽  
Legal Reasoning ◽  
Legal Cases ◽  
Dialectical Approach ◽  
Alternative Method ◽  
Computational Argumentation ◽  
Evidence And Proof

We present a computational argumentation approach that models legal reasoning with evidence and proof as dialectical rather than probabilistic. This hybrid approach of stories and arguments models the process of proof in a way that is compatible with Allen and Pardo's theory of relative plausibility by adding arguments that can be used to show how evidence can support or attack explanations. Using some legal cases as examples, we show how criteria for assessing explanations connect arguments and evidence to story schemes. We show how this hybrid dialectical approach avoids the main problem of the probabilistic approaches, namely that they require precise numbers to be applied in order to decide legal cases. We provide an alternative method that allows fact-finders to reason with evidence holistically and not in the item-by-item fashion proposed by the probabilistic account.

scholarly journals Criminal Sanction for Users of Pornographic Content on Internet Sites: A Pornographic Law Perspecive

2018 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 1
Author(s):  
Ferry Irawan Febriansyah
Keyword(s):  
Research Method ◽  
Legal Reasoning ◽  
Legal Argumentation ◽  
The Internet ◽  
Legal Interpretation ◽  
Internet Site ◽  
Criminal Sanctions ◽  
Internet Users ◽  
Internet Information ◽  
The Government

Inside the internet, information becomes something very important and really life. Mobility is so fast and can be downloaded, produced, and then uploaded again. The internet network is one of the most popular information sources today. Many internet users access pornographic websites because these pornographic websites supported by the development of rapid internet. The purpose of this study is to review Pornographic Law related to cyberporn.  This criminal act is called Cyberporn. Given the enormous impact that is caused by the act of pornography, especially on the internet site, the government legalized the bill against pornography into pornography law with clear criminal provisions. This research method using normative law research method, with a normative juridical approach related to pornography. In relation to this type of research is a normative legal research, then the source of legal material used is the legislation. In accordance with this type of research, the analysis used is a normative juridical analysis that relies on the ability of legal argumentation, legal interpretation, and legal reasoning related to criminal provisions in pornography law. From the results of research have found that criminal provisions in the law number 44 of 2008 on pornography is quite clear that everyone who access on porn sites on the internet threatened with criminal sanctions. Juridically, criminal provisions in pornography law provide legal certainty is quite clear.

scholarly journals Argumentasi Hukum (Legal Reasoning) Dan Kaidah-Kaidah Hukum Masyarakat

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fransiska Novita Eleanora
Keyword(s):  
Legal Reasoning ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Legal Argumentation ◽  
Legal Expert ◽  
Legal Arguments ◽  
The Law

legal argumentation is reasoning about the law or basic search of how a judges the case/case law, a lawyer to argue the law and how a legal expert to reason about the law. The method is bibliography study, result is because the purpose of writing to find out how the application of legal arguments in the community. The result is the application in society must not conflicts with the values and of the life in society.

scholarly journals Função e fundamento da justificação por dedução na teoria da argumentação jurídica de Neil MacCormick

2018 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 72
Author(s):  
Fabrício Diesel Perin
Keyword(s):  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Legal Reasoning ◽  
Legal Rule ◽  
Legal Argumentation ◽  
Second Phase ◽  
Judicial Decision ◽  
Rule Based ◽  
Structural Role ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
Concept Of Law

<p><strong>RESUMO: </strong></p><p>O propósito deste trabalho é explicar a função e o fundamento da justificação por dedução na teoria da argumentação jurídica de Neil MacCormick. Argumenta-se que a justificação por dedução, em primeiro lugar, desempenha função estrutural na argumentação jurídica, ou seja, apresenta a estrutura pela qual os argumentos são dispostos em vista de justificar uma decisão judicial. Além disso, argumenta-se que o fundamento da justificação por dedução muda conforme o conceito de direito empregado por MacCormick é alterado. Em sua primeira fase, MacCormick fundamenta a justificação por dedução em um conceito de direito fundado em regras, de modo que a justificação por dedução evidenciaria a vinculação de uma decisão judicial às regras fundantes do direito. Porém, em uma segunda fase, seu conceito de direito indica que a argumentação jurídica deve estar centrada nos valores encarnados pelo Estado de Direito, de modo que a vinculação de uma decisão judicial a uma regra jurídica por meio da justificação por dedução fundamenta-se no respeito pelo Estado de Direito. </p><p> </p><p><strong>ABSTRACT:</strong></p><p>The purpose of this paper is to explain the function and the grounds of deductive justification in Neil MacCormick’s theory of legal. It is argued that deductive justification, first, plays a structural role in legal argumentation, that is, it presents the structure by which the arguments are arranged in order to justify a judicial decision. Moreover, the ground of deductive justification changes as MacCormick´s concept of law is changed. In his first phase, MacCormick grounds deductive justification on a rule-based concept of law, so that the deductive justification would demonstrate the binding of a judicial decision to the founding rules of law. However, in a second phase, your concept of law indicates that the legal reasoning must be centered on the values embodied by the Rule of Law, so that the binding of a judicial decision to a legal rule by deductive justification is based in the respect for the Rule of Law. </p>

scholarly journals Sanksi Riddah Perspektif Maqasid Al-Shari’ah

2015 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 588-611
Author(s):  
Imroatul Azizah
Keyword(s):  
Death Penalty ◽  
Islamic Law ◽  
Legal Reasoning ◽  
Freedom Of Religion ◽  
Legal Argumentation ◽  
Fundamental Issue ◽  
Islamic Jurisprudence ◽  
The Absolute ◽  
Prophetic Tradition ◽  
Private Matter

Abstract: Riddah (apostasy), in the classical literatures of Islamic Jurisprudence, is categorized as a jarimah al-hudud (criminal act) with death penalty as the punishment. The fundamental issue is that the threat of the death penalty is only based on a single prophetic tradition, while it should be determined by the absolute and valid texts. It means that the death penalty is rooted to an absolute legal argumentation (qat’i al-dalalah), while, there is none of the verses of al-Qur’an which discusses about punishment for the perpetrator of apostasy. Otherwise, al-Qur’an absolutely guaranteesthe freedom of religion and belief. This research uses maqasid al-shari’ah (purposes of Islamic law)as an approach to see the purpose, spirit, and essential valueof the text to be a foundation and method in Islamic legal reasoning. The results of the research are: first, adopting what has been stipulated in al-Qur’an textually and formally without appreciating its purpose and wisdom is not wise; second, apostasy, which is a kind of a private matter between a servant and his God, should not be categorized as a jarimah al-hudud but as a jarimah ta’zir (undefined crime). In certain condition, however, apostasy could be charged by a maximum penalty (death penalty) if it is accompanied by other crimes and is worthyto be sentenced based on a judge’s argumentation.Keywords: Apostasy, sanctions, maqasid al-shari’ah Abstrak: Riddah dalam literatur fiqih klasik dikategorikan sebagai jarimah hudud, dan diancam dengan hukuman mati. Persoalan yang mendasar adalah ancaman hukuman mati tersebut hanya berdasarkan hadis ahad, padahal hudud dikonsepsikan sebagai jarimah dan hukuman yang telah ditentukan secara pasti oleh nass. Berarti hudud meniscayakan dalil yang qat’i al-dalalah, sedangkan dalam al-Qur’an tidak ada satu ayat pun yang membahas hukuman duniawi untuk pelaku riddah, sebaliknya al-Qur’an justru memberikan jaminan kebebasan beragama dan berkeyakinan secara mutlak. Maqasid al-shari’ah dipilih sebagai pendekatan untuk melihat bagaimana tujuan, ruh, dan nilai-nilai esensial shari’at dijadikan landasan dan patokan utama dalam penentuan hukum Islam. Dengan pendekatan maqasid al-shari’ah, diperoleh kesimpulan bahwa bukanlah sikap yang bijak ketika mengadopsi apa yang ditetapkan dalam nass secara literal dan formal legalistik tanpa mengapresiasi tujuan serta hikmah terdalam dari hukum tersebut. Riddah yang merupakan persoalan pribadi antara hamba dengan Tuhan-Nya, tidak selayaknya dikategorikan sebagai jarimah hudud. Namun sebagai jarimah ta’zir, riddah bisa dikenakan hukuman maksimal (mati) jika disertai dengan kejahatan lain yang menurut hakim harus dijatuhi hukuman tersebut.Kata Kunci: Riddah, sanksi, maqasid al-shari’ah

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document