A pragma-dialectical approach of the analysis and evaluation of pragmatic argumentation in a legal context

Argumentation

Volumn 16, Issue 3, 2002, Pages 349-367

  Feteris, Eveline T ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF AMSTERDAM   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Argumentation theory; Causal argumentation; Consequentialist argumentation; Evaluation of argumentation; Legal argumentation; Legal interpretation; Policy arguments; Practical syllogism in legal argumentation; Pragmatic argumentation

Indexed keywords

EID: 27744499796     PISSN: 0920427X     EISSN: 15728374     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1023/A:1019999606665     Document Type: Review

References (29)

1. Alexy, R.: 1989, A Theory of Legal Argumentation. The Theory of Rational Discourse as Theory of Legal Justification, Clarendon, Oxford (translation of Theorie des rationalen Diskurses als Theorie der juristischen Begründung, Suhrkamp, Frankfurt a.M., 1978).
2. Anscombe, G.E.M.: 1957, Intention, Blackwell.
3. Aristotele: 1980, The Nicomachean Ethics. Translated with an introduction by David Ross, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
4. Bell, J.: 1983, Policy Arguments in Judicial Decisions, Clarendon Press, Oxford.
5. Dworkin, R.: 1978, Taking Rights Seriously (Eerste druk 1977), Harvard University Press, Cambridge (Mass.).
6. Dworkin, R.: 1986, Law's Empire, Fontana, London.
7. Eemeren, F.H. van and R. Grootendorst: 1992, Argumentation, Communication and Fallacies, Erlbaum, New York.
8. Golding, M.: 1984, Legal Reasoning, Knofp, New York.
9. Goodin, R.E. and Ph. Pettit: 1993, A Companion to Contemporary Political Philosophy, Blackwell, Cambridge (Mass.).
10. Gottlieh, G.: 1968, The Logic of Choice: An Investigation of the Concepts of Rule and Rationality, Allen and Unwin, London.
11. Hare, R.M.: 1952, The Language of Morals, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
12. Hastings, A.: 1962, A Reformulation of the Modes of Reasoning in Argumentation, Dissertation Northwestern University Evanston, Illinois.
13. MacCormick, N.: 1978, Legal Reasoning and Legal Theory, Clarendon Press, Oxford, pp. 262-263
14. MacCormick, N.: 1995, 'Argumentatio and Interpretation in Law', Argumentation 9(3), 467-480.
15. MacCormick, N.: 1983, 'Legal Decisions and their Consequences: From Dewey to Dworkin', N.Y. University Law Review 58, 239-258.
16. Maccormick, N. and R. Summers: 1991, Interpreting Statutes, Dartmouth, Aldershot.
17. MacCormick, N. and O. Weinberger: 1986, An Institutional Theory of Law, Reidel, Dordrechts.
18. Perelman, Ch. and L. Olbrechts-Tyteca: 1969, The New Rhetoric. A Treatise on Argumentation, University of Notre Dame Press, Notre Dame/London.
19. Pettit, P.: 1991, 'Analtyical Philosophy', in Goodin and Pettit (eds), pp. 7-38.
20. Scheffler, S. (ed.): 1988, Consequentialism and its Critics.
21. Schellens, P.J.: 1984, Redlijke argumenten. Een onderzoek naar normen voor kritische lezers (Reasonable Argument. An Investigation into Norms for Critical Readers). Phd. dissertation Utrecht. Foris, Dordrecht.
22. Snoeck Henkemas, A.F.: 1992, Analysing Complex Argumentation. The Reconstruction of Multiple and Coordinatively Compound Argumentation in a Critical Discussion, SicSat, Amsterdam.
23. Summers, R.S.: 1978, 'Two Types of Substantive Reasons: The Core of a Theory of Common-Law Justification', Cornell Law Review 63, 707-788.
24. Toulmin, S.: 1950, The Place or Reason in Ethics, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
25. Twining, W. and D. Miers: 1991, How to Do Things with Rules. A Primer of Interpretation, Butterworths, London.
26. Walton, D.N.: 1990, Practical Reasoning, Rowman & Littlefield, Savage.
27. Walton, D.N.: 1996, Argumentation Schemes for Presumptive Reasoning. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
28. Wright, G.H. von: 1963, Norm and Action, Routledge and Kegan Paul.
29. Wright, G.H. von: 1972, 'On So-called Practical Inference'. Acta Sociologica 15, 39-53.