Description
Book SynopsisThis book brings together contributions from leading figures in legal studies on analogy and related forms of reasoning in the law. Analogical reasoning-which relies on the concept of two different things being in some way like each other-is hugely important not just in the practice of law, but it is nonetheless strongly contested. This volume raises key questions like: What is the logical, argumentative, rhetorical, or just heuristic force of analogy in law? Is analogy really different from extensive interpretation, reasoning by precedent and appeal to paradigm?
Table of ContentsIntroduction A. Amaya, Imitation and analogy S. Brewer, Indefeasible analogical argument B. Brozek, Is analogy a form of legal reasoning? D. Canale & G. Tuzet, Analogical reasoning and extensive interpretation D. Duarte, Analogy and balancing: the partial reducibility thesis and its problems B. Brozek, Analogy and balancing: a reply to David Duarte D. Duarte, Analogy and balancing once again: a reply to Bartosz Bro?ek M. Golding, Argument by analogy in the law H.J.R. Kaptein, Undoing damage by analogy: as if (almost) nothing happened, with notes on the meaning of everything B.D. van der Velden, Analogy in the strict liability rules in the Dutch Civil Code Bibliography Index
