STUDIES IN LEGAL LOGIC

Law and Philosophy Library

Volumn 70, Issue , 2005, Pages 1-318

  Hage, Jaap ^a  

^a MAASTRICHT UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85125790696     PISSN: 15724395     EISSN: 22150315     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: None     Document Type: Chapter

References (260)

1. Aarnio e.a. 1981 A. Aarnio, R. Alexy and A. Peczenik, The Foundations of Legal Reasoning, Rechtstheorie 12 (1981), 133f, 257f, and 423f.
2. Aarnio 1987 A. Aarnio, The Rational as Reasonable. A Treatise on Legal Justification. Dordrecht: Reidel 1987.
3. Albert 1968 H. Albert, Traktat über kritische Vernunft, Tübingen: Siebeck 1968.
4. Alchourrón and Bulygin 1971 C.E. Alchourrón and E. Bulygin, Normative Systems, Wien: Springer 1971.
5. Alchourrón and Bulygin 1981 C.E. Alchourrón and E. Bulygin, The Expressive Conception of Norms, in Hilpinen 1981, 95-124.
6. Alchourrón 1993 C.E. Alchourrón, Philosophical Foundations of Deontic Logic and the Logic of Defeasible Conditionals. In Meyer and Wieringa 1993, 43-84.
7. Aleven 1997 V. Aleven, Teaching case-based argumentation through a model and examples. PhD-thesis Pittsburgh 1997.
8. Aleven 2003 V. Aleven, Using background knowledge in case-based legal reasoning: A computational model and an intelligent learning environment, Artificial Intelligence 150 (2003), 183-237.
9. Alexy 1978 R. Alexy, Theorie der juristischen Argumentation. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp 1978.
10. Alexy 1979 R. Alexy, Zum Begriff des Rechtprinzips, Rechtstheorie, Beiheft 1 (1979), 59-87.
11. Alexy 1996 R. Alexy, Theorie der Grundrechten, 3e Auflage, Frankfurt a/M: Suhrkamp 1996.
12. Alexy and Peczenik 1990 R. Alexy, and A. Peczenik, The Concept of Coherence and Its Significance for Discursive Rationality, Ratio Juris 3 (1990), 130-147.
13. Alexy 1999 R. Alexy, The Special Case Thesis, Ratio Juris, vol. 12 (1999), 374-384.
14. Alexy 2000 R. Alexy, On the Structure of Legal Principles, Ratio Juris 13 (2000), 294-304.
15. Alexy 2003 R. Alexy, On Balancing and Subsumption. A Structural Comparison, Ratio Juris 16 (2003), 433-449.
16. Alston 1992 W.P. Alston, Foundationalism, in Dancy and Sosa 1992, 144-147.
17. Anscombe 1957 G.E.M. Anscombe, Intention, Oxford: Basil Blackwell 1957.
18. Ashley 1990 K.D. Ashley, Modeling Legal Argument: Reasoning with Cases and Hypotheticals, Cambridge: MIT-Press 1990.
19. Ashley 1991 K.D. Ashley, Reasoning with cases and hypotheticals in HYPO. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies 34 (1991), 753-796.
20. Ashley 1992 K.D. Ashley, Case-Based Reasoning and its implications for Legal Expert Systems, Artificial Intelligence and Law 1 (1992), 113-208.
21. Audi 1998 R. Audi, Epistemology, a contemporary introduction to the theory of knowledge, London: Routledge 1998.
22. nd ed. edited by J.O, Urmson and M. Sbisa, Oxford: University Press 1975. (1st edition 1962)
23. Bankowski 1995 Z. Bankowski, I. White and U. Hahn., Informatics and the Foundations of Legal Reasoning, Dordrecht: Kluwer 1995
24. Barth and Krabbe 1982 E.M. Barth and E.C.W. Krabbe, From Axiom to Dialogue. New York: Walter de Gruyter 1982.
25. Barwise and Perry 1983 J. Barwise and J. Perry, Situations and Attitudes, Cambridge: MIT Press 1983.
26. Bayón 2001 J.C. Bayón, Why is legal reasoning defeasible?, in Soeteman 2001, 327-346.
27. Bench-Capon e.a. 1992 T.J.M. Bench-Capon, P.E.S. Dunne and P.H. Leng, A dialogue game for dialectical interaction with expert systems, Proceedings of the 12th Expert Systems Conference, Avignon 1992.
28. Bench-Capon 1997 T.J.M. Bench-Capon, Arguing with cases, in Oskamp e.a. 1997, 85-100.
29. Bench-Capon and Rissland 2001 T.J.M. Bench-Capon and E.L. Rissland, Back to the Future: Dimensions Revisited, in Verheij 2001, 41-52.
30. Bench-Capon and Sartor 2001 T.J.M. Bench-Capon and G. Sartor, Theory based explanation of case law domains, Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law, ACM Press, New York 2001, 12-21.
31. Bench-Capon e.a. 2002 T.J.M. Bench-Capon, T. Daskalopulu and R. Winkels (eds.), Proceedings Jurix 2002, Amsterdam: IOS Press 2002.
32. Bench-Capon and Sartor 2003 T.J.M. Bench-Capon and G. Sartor, A Model of Legal Reasoning with Cases Incorporating Theories and Values, Artificial Intelligence 150 (2003), 97-143.
33. Bender 1989 (CSCT) J.W. Bender (ed.), The Current State of the Coherence Theory, Dordrecht: Kluwer 1989.
34. Bender 1989 (CJK) J.W. Bender, Coherence, Justification, and Knowledge: The Current Debate, in Bender 1989 (CSCT), 1-14.
35. Blackburn and Simmons 1999 S. Blackburn and K. Simmons (eds.), Truth, Oxford: University Press 1999.
36. Bracker 2000 S. Bracker, Kohärenz und juristische Interpretation. Baden-Baden: Nomos 2000.
37. Breuker 2000 J. Breuker e.a. (eds.), Proceedings of the Thirteenth Jurix Conference, Amsterdam: IOS Press 2000.
38. Brewka and Gordon 1994 G. Brewka and T. F. Gordon, How to buy a porsche, an approach to defeasible decision making. In Working Notes of the AAAI-94 Workshop on Computational Dialectics, Seattle, Washington 1994, 28-38.
39. Brouwer e.a.1992 P.W. Brouwer e.a. (eds.), Coherence and Conflict in Law, Deventer: Kluwer 1992.
40. Brouwer e.a.1999 P.W. Brouwer e.a. (red.), Drie dimensies van recht, Den Haag: BJu, 1999.
41. Brozek 2004 B. Brozek, Defeasibility of legal reasoning, Zakamyce: Kantor 2004.
42. Bulygin 1999 E. Bulygin, True or false statements in normative discourse, in Egidi 1999, 183-191.
43. Bulygin 2003 Eugenio Bulygin, Review of Jaap Hage’s Law and Defeasibility, Artificial Intelligence and Law 11 (2003), 245-250.
44. Burg 2000 E. Burg, The Model of Principles. The quest for rationality in the implementation of conflicting principles. PhD-thesis, Amsterdam 2000.
45. Chiassoni 2001 P. Chiassoni (ed.), The Legal Ought, Torino: G. Giapichelli Editore 2001.
46. Chisholm 1989 R.M. Chisholm, Theory of Knowledge (3rd ed.), Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall 1989.
47. Cliteur e.a. 1997 P.B. Cliteur, B.C. Labuschagne en C.E. Smith, Rechtsfilosofische stromingen van de twintigste eeuw. Deventer: Gouda Quint 1997.
48. Dancy and Sosa 1992 J. Dancy and E. Sosa, A Companion to Epistemology, Oxford: Blackwell 1992
49. Davidson and Harman 1972 D. Davidson and G. Harman (eds.), Semantics of natural language (2nd ed.), Dordrecht: Reidel 1972
50. Den Haan 1996 N. den Haan, Automated Legal Reasoning. PhD-thesis, Amsterdam 1996.
51. Devitt 1991 M. Devitt, Realism and Truth, 2nd edition, Oxford: Basil Blackwell 1991.
52. Donnellan 1966 K.S. Donnellan, Reference and Definite Descriptions, The Philosophical Review LXXV (1966), 281-304. Also in Schwartz 1977, 42-65.
53. Dworkin 1978 R. Dworkin, Taking Rights Seriously, 2nd ed., London: Duckworth 1978.
54. Dworkin 1985 R. Dworkin, A matter of principle. Clarendon Press, Oxford 1985.
55. Dworkin 1986 R. Dworkin, Laws Empire, London: Fontana 1986.
56. Dung 1995 P.M. Dung, On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in nonmonotonic reasoning, logic programming and n-person games, Artificial Intelligence 77 (1995), 321-357.
57. Edwards 1988 W. Edwards, Summing up: The society of Bayesian trial lawyers. In Tillers and Green 1988, 337-342.
58. Egidi 1999 R. Egidi (ed.), In Search of a New Humanism, Dordrecht: Kluwer 1999.
59. Fahrenbach 1973 H. Fahrenbach (ed.), Wirklichkeit und Reflexion, Festschrift für W. Schulz, Pfullingen 1973.
60. Feteris 1994 E.T. Feteris, Redelijkheid in juridische argumentatie (Rationality in legal argumentation), Zwolle: Tjeenk Willink 1994.
61. Fiedler 1986 H. Fiedler, Formalisierung im Recht und Ansätze juristischer Expertensysteme, München 1986.
62. Folgelklau and Spaak 2003 A. Folgelklou and T. Spaak (eds.), Festskrift till Ake Frändberg, Uppsala: Iustus Förlag 2003
63. Freeman and Farley 1996 K. Freeman, and A.M. Farley, A Model of Argumentation and Its Application to Legal Reasoning. Artificial Intelligence and Law 4 (1996), 163-197. Also in Prakken and Sartor 1997, 7-41.
64. Fuller 1958 L.L. Fuller, Positivism and Fidelity to Law: A Reply to Professor Hart, Harvard Law Review. vol. 71 (1958), 630-672.
65. Fuller 1969 L.L. Fuller, The Morality of Law, 2nd ed., New Haven: Yale University Press 1969.
66. nd ed.), volume 4. Dordrecht: Kluwer 2001.
67. rd ed.), Oxford: Basil Blackwell 1980.
68. Geffner and Pearl 1992 H. Geffner and J. Pearl, Conditional entailment: bridging two approaches to default reasoning, Artificial Intelligence 53 (1992), 209-244.
69. Ginsberg 1987 M.L. Ginsberg (ed.), Readings in Nonmonotonic Reasoning, Los Altos: Morgan Kauffman 1987
70. Gordon 1986 Th. F. Gordon, The Role of Exceptions in Models of the Law, in Fiedler 1986, 52-59.
71. Gordon 1991 Th. F. Gordon, An abductive theory of legal issues, International Journal of Man-Machine Studies 35 (1991), 95-118.
72. Gordon 1994 Th. F. Gordon, The Pleadings Game: An Exercise in Computational Dialectics, Artificial Intelligence and Law 2 (1994), 239-292.
73. Gordon 1995 Th. F. Gordon, The Pleadings Game, An Artificial Intelligence Model of Procedural Justice, Dordrecht: Kluwer 1995.
74. Gordon 1997 Th. F. Gordon and N. Karacapilidis, The Zeno Argumentation Framework, Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law. New York: ACM 1997, 10-18.
75. Grayling 1997 A.C. Grayling, An Introduction to Philosophical Logic (3rd. ed.), Oxford: Blackwell 1997.
76. Grütters e.a. 1992 C.A.F.M. Grütters,, J.A.P.J. Breuker, H.J. Van den Herik, A.H.J. Schmidt, and C.N.J. de Vey Mestdagh (eds.), Legal Knowledge Based Systems: Information Technology and Law, JURIX '92, Lelystad: Vermande 1992.
77. Haack 1978 S. Haack, Philosophy of Logics, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 1978.
78. Haack 1993 S. Haack, Evidence and Inquiry. Towards Reconstruction in Epistemology. Oxford: Blackwell 1993.
79. Haack 1999 S. Haack, A Foundherentist Theory of Empirical Justification, in Pojman 1999, 283-293.
80. Habermas 1973 J. Habermas, Wahrheitstheorieën, in Fahrenbach 1973, 211-265.
81. Hage 1987 J.C. Hage, Feiten en betekenis. Een verhandeling over ontologie en praktische rede. (Facts and Meaning; a treatise on ontology and practical reason.) PhD-thesis Leiden 1987.
82. Hage e.a. 1992 J.C. Hage, G.P.J. Span and A.R. Lodder, A Dialogical Model of Legal Reasoning, in Grütters e.a. 1992, 135-146.
83. Hage e.a. 1994 J.C. Hage, R. Leenes and A. Lodder, Hard cases; a procedural approach, Artificial Intelligence and Law 2 (1994), 113-167.
84. Hage 1996 J.C. Hage, A Model of Legal Reasoning and a Logic to Match. Artificial Intelligence and Law 4 (1996), 199-273. Also in Prakken and Sartor 1997, 43-117.
85. Hage 1997 (RwR) J.C. Hage, Reasoning with rules, Dordrecht: Kluwer 1997.
86. Hage 1997 (Leg) J.C. Hage, Legitimatietheorieën, (Theories of legitimation), in Cliteur e.a. 1997, 243-282.
87. Hage 1999 (RC) J.C. Hage, Rule Consistency, in Van den Herik 1999, 47-60.
88. Hage and Verheij 1999 J.C. Hage and H.B. Verheij, The law as a dynamic interconnected system of states of affairs: a legal top ontology. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 51 (1999), 1043-1077.
89. Hage 1999 (TLR) J.C. Hage, Twee lagen van het recht (Two layers of the law), in Brouwer e.a. 1999, 197-217.
90. Hage 1999 (MNDL) J.C. Hage, Moderately Naturalistic Deontic Logic, in McNamara and Prakken 1999, 55-72.
91. Hage 2000 (RC) J.C. Hage, Rule Consistency, Law and Philosophy 19 (2000), 369-390.
92. Hage 2000 (GTE) J.C. Hage, Goal-based Theory Evaluation. In Breuker 2000, 59-72.
93. Hage 2000 (CRN) J.C. Hage, Consistency of Rules and Norms. Information & Communications Technology Law 9 (2000), 219-240.
94. Hage 2000 (DM) J.C. Hage, Dialectical Models in Artificial Intelligence and Law, Artificial Intelligence and Law 8 (2000), 137-172.
95. Hage and Peczenik 2000 J.C. Hage and A. Peczenik, Law, Morals, and Defeasibility, Ratio Juris 13 (2000), 305-325.
96. Hage 2001 (LL) J.C. Hage, Legal Logic. It’s Existence, Nature and Use, in Soeteman 2001, 347-373.
97. Hage 2001 (FLC) J.C. Hage, Formalizing legal coherence. Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law, New York: ACM 2001.
98. Hage and Peczenik 2001 J.C. Hage and A. Peczenik, Legal internalism, in Chiassoni 2001, 141-170.
99. Hage and Sartor 2003 J.C. Hage and G. Sartor, Legal Theory Construction, Associations 7 (2003), 171-184.
100. Hage 2003 (LRI) J.C. Hage, Legal Reasoning and Legal Integration, Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law 10 (2003), 67-97.
101. Hage 2003 (LD) Jaap Hage, Law and Defeasibility, Artificial Intelligence and Law 11 (2003), 221-243.
102. Hage 2004 J.C. Hage, Law and Coherence, Ratio Juris 17 (2004), 87-105.
103. Hale and Wright 1997 B. Hale and C. Wright, A Companion to the Philosophy of Language, Oxford: Blackwell 1997.
104. Hamblin 1970 C.L. Hamblin, Fallacies. London: Methuen 1970.
105. Hamner Hill 1987 H. Hamner Hill, A functional taxonomy of normative conflict. Law and Philosophy 6 (1987), 227-247.
106. Hare 1952 R.M. Hare, The Language of Morals, Oxford: University Press 1952.
107. Hare 1963 R.M. Hare, Freedom and Reason, Oxford: University Press 1963.
108. Hare 1981 R.M. Hare, Moral Thinking. Its Levels, method and point, Oxford: Clarendon Press 1981.
109. Hart 1949 H.L.A. Hart, The Ascription of Responsibility and Rights. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, 49 (1949), 171-194.
110. Hart 1961 H.L.A. Hart, The Concept of Law, Oxford: Clarendon Press 1961.
111. Hilpinen 1981 R. Hilpinen (ed.), New Studies in Deontic Logic. Norms, Actions, and the Foundation of Ethics, Dordrecht: Reidel 1981.
112. Honderich 1995 T. Honderich (ed.), The Oxford Companion to Philosophy, Oxford: University Press 1995
113. Israel 1980 D.J. Israel, What’s wrong with non-monotonic logic?, Proceedings of the First Annual Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Stanford 1980, 99-101. Also in Ginsberg 1987, 53-55.
114. Jones 1995 O.R. Jones, Supervenience, in Honderich 1995, 860.
115. Kaptein 1995 H. Kaptein, The redundancy of precedent and analogy. Or Eat s**t, five billion flies can't be wrong, in Van Eemeren 1995, 122-137.
116. Keeney and Raiffa 1993 R.L. Keeney and H. Raiffa, Decision with Multiple Objectives. Preferences and Value Tradeoffs (2nd ed.), Cambridge: University Press 1993.
117. Kelsen 1960 H. Kelsen, Reine Rechtslehre (2e Auflage), Wien: Franz Deuticke 1960.
118. Kelsen 1979 H. Kelsen, Allgemeine Theorie der Normen, (K. Ringhofer and R. Walter eds.), Wien: Manz-Verlag 1979.
119. Kim and Sosa 1995 J. Kim and E. Sosa, A Companion to Metaphysics, Oxford: Blackwell 1995.
120. Kirkham 1992 R.L. Kirkham, Theories of Truth, Cambridge: MIT Press 1992.
121. Kloosterhuis 1995 H. Kloosterhuis, The study of analogy argumentation in law: four pragma-dialectical starting points, in Van Eemeren 1995, 138-145.
122. Kress 1996 K. Kress, Coherence, in Patterson 1996, 533-552.
123. Kripke 1972 S.A. Kripke, Naming and Necessity, in Davidson and Harman 1972, 253-355.
124. Lambert 1995 K. Lambert, Meinong, Alexius, in Kim and Sosa 1995, 305–307.
125. Larenz 1983 K. Larenz, Methodenlehre der Rechtswissenschaftt (5th ed.), Berlin: Springer 1983.
126. Leenes e.a. 1994 R.E. Leenes, A.R. Lodder and J.C. Hage, A Dialogue Game for Legal Arguments. Law, Computers & Artificial Intelligence 3 (1994), 211-226.
127. Leenes 1999 R.E. Leenes, Hercules of Karneades, PhD thesis, Enschede 1999.
128. Legrand 1997 P. Legrand, Against a European Civil Code, Modern Law Review 60, (1997), nr. 1.
129. Lehrer 2000 K. Lehrer, Theory of Knowledge (2nd ed.), London: Routledge 2000.
130. Lindahl 1977 L. Lindahl, Position and Change. A Study in Law and Logic. Dordrecht: Reidel 1977.
131. Lindahl 1992 L. Lindahl, Conflicts in Systems of Legal Norms: A Logical Point of View, in Brouwer 1992, 39-64.
132. Lindahl and Odelstad 2004 L. Lindahl and J. Odelstad, Normative Positions Within an Algebraic Approach to Normative Systems, Journal of Applied Logic 2 (2004).
133. Lloyd 1979 D. Lloyd, Introduction to jurisprudence, 4h ed. with M.D.A. Freeman as co-editor. London: Stevens and Sons 1979.
134. Lodder and Herczog 1995 A. Lodder and A. Herczog, DiaLaw: A Computational Framework for Dialectical Reasoning. Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law, New York: ACM 1995, 146-155.
135. Lodder 1997 A. Lodder, Procedural arguments, in Oskamp 1997, 21-32.
136. Lodder 1998 A. Lodder, DiaLaw. On Legal Justification and Dialog Games. PhD-thesis Maastricht 1998.
137. Lodder 1999 A. Lodder, DiaLaw. On Legal Justification and Dialogical Models of Argumentation, Dordrecht: Kluwer 1999.
138. Lorenzen and Lorenz 1978 P. Lorenzen and K. Lorenz, Dialogische Logik, Darmstadt: Wissenschafliche Buchgesellschaft 1978.
139. Loui 1987 R.P. Loui, Defeat among arguments: a system of defeasible inference. Computational Intelligence 2 (1987), 100-106.
140. Loui and Norman 1995 R.P. Loui and J. Norman, Rationales and Argument Moves. Artificial Intelligence and Law 3 (1995), 159-189.
141. Loui 1997 R.P. Loui et al., Progress on Room 5. Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law, New York: ACM 1997, 207-214.
142. Lukaszewicz 1990 W. Lukaszewicz, Non-Monotonic Reasoning; formalization of commonsense reasoning. London: Ellis Horwood 1990.
143. MacCormick 1972 D.N. MacCormick, Legal Obligation and the Imperative Fallacy, in Simpson 1972, 100-130.
144. MacCormick 1978 D.N. MacCormick, Legal Reasoning and Legal Theory, Oxford: Clarendon Press 1978.
145. MacCormick 1995 D.N. MacCormick, Defeasibility in law and logic, in Bankowski 1995, 99-118.
146. MacCormick and Weinberger 1986 D.N. MacCormick and O. Weinberger, An Institutional Theory of Law, Dordrecht: Reidel 1986.
147. McNamara and Prakken 1999 P. McNamara and H. Prakken (eds.), Norms, Logics and Information Systems, Amsterdam: IOS Press 1999.
148. Mazzarese 1991 T. Mazzarese, ‘Norm Proposition’: Epistemic and Semantic Queries, Rechtstheorie 22 (1991), 39-70.
149. Mazzarese 1999 T. Mazzarese, “Norm proposition”. A Tentative Defense of a Skeptical View, in Egidi 1999, 193-204.
150. McCarty 1997 L.T. McCarty, Some Arguments about Legal Arguments. Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law, New York: ACM 1997, 215-224.
151. Meyer and Wieringa 1993 J.-J.Ch, Meyer and R.J. Wieringa (eds.), Deontic Logic in Computer Science, Chicester: John Wiley 1993.
152. Miller 2003 A. Miller, An Introduction to Contemporary Metaethics, Cambridge: Polity Press 2003.
153. Moser 1989 P. K. Moser, Lehrer’s Coherentism and the Isolation Objection, in Bender 1989 (CSCT), 29-37.
154. Neurath 1932/3 O. Neurath, Protocol Sentences, in Ayer 1959, 199-208. Originally (in German) in Erkenntnis 1932/3, 204-214.
155. Nieuwenhuis 1976 J.H. Nieuwenhuis, Legitimatie en heuristiek van het rechterlijk oordeel, Rechtsgeleerd Magazijn Themis (1976), 494-515.
156. Nitta e.a. 1993 K. Nitta, S. Wong and Y. Othake, A Computational Model for Trial Reasoning. Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law, New York: ACM Press 1993, 20-29.
157. Nitta e.a. 1995 K. Nitta, M. Shibasaki, T. Sakata, T. Yamaji, W. Xianchang, H. Ohsaki, S. Tojo, I. Kokubo and T. Suzuki, New HELIC-II: A Software Tol for Legal Reasoning, Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law, New York: ACM 1995, 287-296.
158. Odelstad and Lindahl 2002 J. Odelstad and L. Lindahl, The Role of Connections as Minimal Norms in Normative Systems, in Bench-Capon e.a. 2002, 31-40.
159. Oskamp e.a. 1997 A. Oskamp e.a. (eds.), Proceedings of the Tenth Jurix Conference, Amsterdam: IOS 1997.
160. Patarro 2001 E. Patarro, Towards a Theory of Norms, in Chiassoni 2001, 11-36.
161. Patterson 1996 D. Patterson (ed.), A Companion to Philosophy of Law and Legal Theory, Oxford: Blackwell 1996.
162. Peczenik and Uusitalo 1979 A. Peczenik and J. Uusitalo (eds.), Reasoning on legal reasoning, Vammala: Vammalan Kirsjapoino Oy 1979.
163. Peczenik 1989 A. Peczenik, On Law and Reason, Dordrecht: Kluwer 1989.
164. Peczenik 1997 A. Peczenik, Jumps and Logic in the Law, in Prakken and Sartor 1997 (LM), 141-174.
165. Peczenik and Hage 2000 A. Peczenik and J.C. Hage, Legal Knowledge about What?, Ratio Juris 13 (2000), 326-345.
166. Perelman and Olbrechts-Tyteca 1969 Ch. Perelman and L. Olbrechts-Tyteca, The New Rhetoric; a Treatise on Argumentation. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press 1969.
167. Pojman 1999 L. Pojman (ed.), The Theory of Knowledge: Classical and Contemporary Readings (2nd ed.), Belmont: Wadsworth 1999
168. Pollock 1987 J.L. Pollock, Defeasible Reasoning, Cognitive Science 11 (1987), 481-518.
169. Pollock 1994 J.L. Pollock, Justification and defeat, Artificial Intelligence 67 (1994), 377-407.
170. Pollock 1995 J.L. Pollock, Cognitive Carpentry, Cambridge: MIT-Press 1995.
171. Pollock and Cruz 1999 J.L. Pollock and J. Cruz, Contemporary theories of knowledge (2nd. ed.), Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield 1999.
172. Popper 1972 K.R. Popper, The Logic of Scientific Discovery, London: Hutchinson 1972.
173. Prakken e.a. 1994 H. Prakken, A.J. Muntjewerff and A. Soeteman (eds.), Legal knowledge based systems; the relation with legal theory, Lelystad: Koninklijke Vermande 1994.
174. Prakken 1995 H. Prakken, From Logic to Dialectics in Legal Argument. Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law, New York: ACM 1995, 165-174.
175. Prakken and Sartor 1996 H. Prakken, and G. Sartor, A Dialectical Model of Assessing Conflicting Arguments in Legal Reasoning, Artificial Intelligence and Law 4 (1996), 331-368. Also in Prakken and Sartor 1997, 331-368.
176. Prakken and Sartor 1997 (LM) H. Prakken and G. Sartor (eds.), Logical Models of Legal Argumentation, Dordrecht: Kluwer 1997.
177. Prakken and Sartor 1997 (RP) H. Prakken and G. Sartor, Reasoning with Precedents in a Dialogue Game, Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law, New York: ACM 1997, 1-9.
178. Prakken 1997 H. Prakken, Logical Tools for Modelling Legal Argument, A Study of Defeasible Reasoning in Law, Dordrecht: Kluwer 1997.
179. Prakken and Sartor 1998 H. Prakken and G. Sartor, Modelling Reasoning with Precedents in a Formal Dialogue Game. Artificial Intelligence and Law 6 (1998), 231-287.
180. Prakken and Vreeswijk 2001 H. Prakken and G. Vreeswijk, Logics for defeasible argumentation, in Gabbay and Guenthner 2001.
181. Prakken 2001 H. Prakken, Modelling reasoning about evidence in legal procedure, Proceedings of the Eight International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law, New York: ACM 2001, 119-128.
182. Prakken e.a. 2003 H. Prakken, C. Reed and D. Walton, Argumentation schemes and generalisations in reasoning about evidence, Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law, Edinburgh, 2003. New York: ACM Press 2003.
183. Prakken and Sartor 2004 H. Prakken and G. Sartor,. The Three Faces of Defeasibility in the Law, Ratio Juris 17 (2004), 118-139.
184. Puntel 1983 L.B. Puntel, Wahrheitstheorien in der neueren Philosophie, Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft 1983.
185. Putnam 1975 (MLR) H. Putnam, Mind, Language and Reality; Philosophical Papers, vol. 2, Cambridge: University Press 1975.
186. Putnam 1975 (MM) H. Putnam, The Meaning of 'Meaning', in Putnam 1975 (MLR), 215-271.
187. Quine 1953 W.V. Quine, From a Logical Point of View, New York: Harper & Row 1953.
188. Quine 1956 W.V. Quine, Quantifiers and Propositional Attitudes, Journal of Philosophy 53 (1956). Also in Quine 1976, 185-196.
189. Quine 1976 W.V. Quine, The Ways of Paradox and other essays (2nd ed.), Cambridge, Harvard University Press: 1976.
190. Quine 1986 W.V. Quine, Philosophy of Logic (2nd ed.), Cambridge: Harvard University Press 1986.
191. Radbruch 1973 G. Radbruch, Rechtsphilosophie (4th ed.), edited by E. Wolf und H-P Schneider, Stuttgart: Koehler Verlag 1973.
192. Ramsey 1931 F.P. Ramsey, The Foundation of Mathematics, London: Routledge and Kegan Paul 1931.
193. Ramsey 1999 F.P. Ramsey, On Facts and Propositions, in Blackburn and Simmons 1999, 106-107. Originally in Ramsey 1931.
194. Rawls 1972 J. Rawls, A Theory of Justice, Oxford: University Press 1972.
195. Raz 1975 J. Raz, Practical Reason and Norms, London: Hutchinson 1975.
196. Raz 1979 J. Raz, The Authority of Law; Essays on Law and Morality, Oxford: Clarendon Press 1979.
197. Raz 1986 J. Raz, The Morality of Freedom, Oxford: Clarendon Press 1986.
198. Raz 1994 (EPC) J. Raz, Ethics in the Public Domain. Essays in the Morality of Law and Politics, Oxford: Clarendon Press 1994.
199. Raz 1994 (RC) J. Raz, The Relevance of Coherence, in Raz 1994, 277-326.
200. Redondo 1999 C. Redondo, Reasons for Action and the Law, Dordrecht: Kluwer 1999.
201. Rissland and Ashley 1987 E.L. Rissland and K.D. Ashley, A Case Based System for Trade Secrets Law, Proceedings of the First International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law, New York: ACM 1987, 60-66.
202. Rissland and Skalak 1991 E.L. Rissland and D.B. Skalak, CABARET: rule interpretation in a hybrid structure, International Journal for Man-Machine Studies 34 (1991), 839-887.
203. Rissland, Skalak and Friedman 1996 E.L. Rissland, D.B. Skalak and M.T. Friedman, Bank XX: Supporting Legal Arguments through Heuristic Retrieval, Artificial Intelligence and Law 4 (1996), 1-71.
204. Ross 1957. A. Ross, Tû-Tû. Harvard Law Review 70 (1957), 812.
205. Roth 2003 B. Roth, Case-based reasoning in the law. A formal theory of reasoning by case comparison. PhD-thesis, Maastricht 2003.
206. Royakkers 1996 L.M.M. Royakker, Representing L∃∃ g ∀ l Rules in Deontic Logic, Tilburg 1996.
207. Ruiter 1993 D.W.P. Ruiter, Institutional Legal Facts. Legal Powers and their Effects, Dordrecht: Kluwer 1993.
208. Ruiter 1997 D.W.P. Ruiter, Legal validity qua specific mode of existence. Law and Philosophy 16 (1997), 479-505.
209. Rumelhart and McClelland 1986 D.E.Rumelhart, J.L. McClelland and the PDP Research Group, Parallel Distributed Processing. Explorations in the Microstructure of Cognition. Volume 1: Foundations, Cambridge: MIT Press 1986.
210. Sartor 1994 G. Sartor, A Formal Model of Legal Argumentation. Ratio Juris 7 (1994), 177-211.
211. Sartor 1995 G. Sartor, Defeasibility in Legal Reasoning, in Bankowski 1995, 119-158.
212. Sartor 2005 G. Sartor, Legal Reasoning, to appear in the Springer series of Treatises in Legal Theory.
213. Schauer 1991 F. Schauer, Playing by the rules. Oxford: Clarendon Press 1991.
214. Schwartz 1977 S.P Schwartz (ed.), Naming, Necessity, and Natural Kinds, Ithaca: Cornell University Press 1977.
215. Schwemmer and Lorenzen 1973 O. Schwemmer and P. Lorenzen, Konstruktive Logik, Ethik und Wissenschaftstheorie, Mannheim 1973.
216. Searle 1969 J.R. Searle, Speech acts. An essay in the philosophy of language. Cambridge: University Press 1969.
217. Searle 1979 J.R. Searle, Expression and Meaning. Studies in the theory of speech acts, Cambridge: University Press 1979.
218. Searle and Vanderveken 1985 J.R. Searle and D. Vanderveken, Foundations of Illocutionary Logic, Cambridge: University Press 1985.
219. Searle 1995 J.R. Searle, The construction of social reality, New York: The Free Press 1995.
220. Simpson 1972 A.W.B. Simpson, Oxford Essays in Jurisprudence, Oxford: 1972,
221. Skalak and Rissland 1991 D.B. Skalak and E.L. Rissland, Argument Moves in a Rule-Guided Domain. Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law, New York: ACM 1991, 1-11.
222. Skalak and Rissland 1992 D.B. Skalak, and E.L Rissland, Arguments and Cases: An Inevitable Intertwining. Artificial Intelligence and Law 1 (1992), 3-44.
223. Smith 1994 M. Smith, The Moral Problem, Oxford: Blackwell 1994.
224. Smits 2002 J. Smits, The Making of European Private Law, Antwerpen: Intersentia 2002.
225. Soeteman 1989 A. Soeteman, Logic in Law. Remarks on Logic and Rationality in Normative Reasoning, Especially in Law, Dordrecht: Kluwer 1989.
226. Soeteman 2001 A. Soeteman (ed.), Pluralism and law. Dordrecht: Kluwer 2001.
227. Soeteman 2003 A. Soeteman, Do we need a legal logic? In Folgelklou and Spaak 2003, 221-234.
228. Sosa 1989 E. Sosa, Equilibrium in Coherence?, in Bender 1989 (CSCT), 242-250.
229. Stalnaker 1997 R. Stalnaker, Reference and necessity, in Hale and Wright 1997, 534-554.
230. Stone 1968 J. Stone, Legal System and Lawyer’s Reasoning, Stanford: University Press 1968.
231. Strawson 1952 P.F. Strawson, Introduction to Logical Theory, London: Methuen 1952.
232. Strawson 1959 P.F. Strawson, Individuals. An essay in descriptive metaphysics, London: Methuen 1959.
233. Strawson 1971 P.F. Strawson, Logico Linguistic Papers, London: Methuen, 1971.
234. Thagard 1992 P. Thagard, Conceptual Revolutions, Princeton: University Press 1992.
235. Thagard and Verbeurgt 1998 P. Thagard and K. Verbeurgt, Coherence as constraint satisfaction. Cognitive Science 22 (1998), 1-24.
236. Thagard 1999 P. Thagard, Ethical Coherence, Philosophical Psychology 11 (1999), 405-422.
237. Tillers and Green 1988 P. Tillers and E.D. Green (eds.), Probability and inference in the law of evidence: The uses and limits of Bayesianism. Dordrecht: Kluwer 1988.
238. Toulmin 1953 S.E. Toulmin, The Philosophy of Science. An Introduction, London: Hutchinson 1953.
239. Toulmin 1958 S.E. Toulmin, The Uses of Argument, London: Cambridge University Press 1958.
240. Twining 1985 W.L. Twining, Theories of evidence: Bentham and Wigmore. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press 1985.
241. Twining 1991 W.L. Twining, Rethinking evidence. Evanston: Northwestern University Press 1991.
242. Van den Herik e.a. 1999 H.J. van den Herik e.a. (eds.), Proceedings of the Twelfth Jurix Conference, Nijmegen: GNI 1999.
243. Van Eemeren e.a. 1995 F.H. van Eemeren et al. (eds.), Proceedings of the Third ISSA Conference on Argumentation, vol. IV, Special Fields and Cases, Amsterdam: Sic Sat 1995.
244. Verheij and Hage 1994 H.B. Verheij and J.C. Hage, Reasoning by analogy; a formal reconstruction. In Prakken e.a. 1994, 65-78.
245. Verheij 1996 H.B. Verheij, Rules, Reasons, Arguments. Formal studies of argumentation and defeat. Ph-D thesis Maastricht University 1996.
246. Verheij 1999 H.B. Verheij, Logic, Context, and Valid Inference. Or: Can there be a Logic of Law? in Van den Herik 1999, 109-121.
247. Verheij 2003 (DL) H.B. Verheij, Deflog: on the Logical Interpretation of Prima Facie Justified Assumptions, J. Logic Computat. 13 (2003), 319-346.
248. Verheij 2003 (AAA) H.B. Verheij, Artificial argument assistants for defeasible argumentation, Artificial Intelligence 150 (2003), 291-324.
249. Verheij 2005 H.B. Verheij, Virtual Arguments. On the Design of Argument Assistants for Lawyers and Other Arguers, Den Haag: T.M.C. Asser Press.
250. Von Wright 1963 G.H. von Wright, Norm and Action, London: Routledge and Kegan Paul 1963.
251. Von Wright 1991 G.H. von Wright, Is There a Logic of Norms?, Ratio Juris 4 (1991), 265-283.
252. Vreeswijk 1993 G.A.W. Vreeswijk, Studies in Defeasible Argumentation. PhD-thesis, Amsterdam 1993.
253. Vreeswijk 2000 G.A.W. Vreeswijk, Representation of Formal Dispute with a Standing Order, Artificial Intelligence and Law 8 (2000), 205-231.
254. Weinberger 1989 O. Weinberger, Rechtslogik (2nd ed.), Berlin: Duncker & Humblot 1989.
255. Wolenski 1979 J. Wolenski, Context of discovery, context ofjustification and analysis of legal decision making, in Peczenik and Uusitalo 1979, 115-120.
256. Wolenski 1982 (JL) J. Wolenski, Was ist juristische Logik?, Schriftenreihe Methodologie der marxistisch-leninistischen Rechtswissenschaft; Heft 10: Probleme des objektiven und subjectiven Rechts, Leipzig 1982, 176-189.
257. Wolenski 1982 (DS) J. Wolenski, Deontic sentences, possible worlds and norms, Reports on Philosophy (of the Jagiellonian University) 6, 65-73.
258. Wróblewski 1992 J. Wróblewski, The Judicial Application of Law, edited by Z. Bankowski and N. MacCormick, Dordrecht: Kluwer 1992.
259. Zalta 2002 Edward N. Zalta, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2002 edition), http://plato.stanford.edu/.
260. Zippelius 1974 R. Zippelius, Einführung in die juristische Methodenlehre (2nd ed.), München: Beck 1974.