Location

Brock University

Document Type

Paper

Start Date

15-5-1997 9:00 AM

End Date

17-5-1997 5:00 PM

Abstract

In this contribution two approaches of legal analogy-argumentation will be discussed: the traditional, monological approach and the dialogical approach. This contribution aims at answering the question in how far these approaches may serve as adequate instruments for rational reconstructions of this analogy-argumentation. We will also indicate along which lines the insights resulting from these approaches may be developed further in order to arrive at a more comprehensive and systematic method for a rational reconstruction of argumentation of this sort. We will make use of the insights gained from the pragma-dialectical argumentation theory.

Creative Commons License

Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Response to Submission

Jerome Bickenbach, Commentary on Kloosterhuis

Reader's Reactions

Jerome Bickenbach, Commentary on Kloosterhuis (May 1997)

Included in

Philosophy Commons

Share

COinS
 
May 15th, 9:00 AM May 17th, 5:00 PM

The Reconstruction of Legal Analogy-Argumentation: Monological and Dialogical Approaches

Brock University

In this contribution two approaches of legal analogy-argumentation will be discussed: the traditional, monological approach and the dialogical approach. This contribution aims at answering the question in how far these approaches may serve as adequate instruments for rational reconstructions of this analogy-argumentation. We will also indicate along which lines the insights resulting from these approaches may be developed further in order to arrive at a more comprehensive and systematic method for a rational reconstruction of argumentation of this sort. We will make use of the insights gained from the pragma-dialectical argumentation theory.