{"product_id":"legal-argumentation-and-evidence-9780271058351","title":"Legal Argumentation and Evidence","description":"\u003cb\u003eBook Synopsis\u003c\/b\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003cp\u003eWalton focuses in this new book on how reasoning operates in trials and other legal contexts, with special emphasis on the law of evidence. This dialogical model gives new meaning to the key notions of relevance and probative weight, with the latter analyzed in terms of pragmatic criteria for what constitutes plausible evidence rather than truth.\u003c\/p\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003cb\u003eTrade Review\u003c\/b\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003cp\u003e“In this book Douglas Walton builds on his earlier research and shows how it has application to many of the difficult questions that arise in legal reasoning. He brings a dialectical theory of argumentation as well as a theory of plausible reasoning to bear on the traditional problems of legal evidence.\u003ci\u003e Legal Argumentation and Evidence\u003c\/i\u003e is an original and important contribution not only to legal reasoning but also to the development of argumentation theory, critical thinking, and reasoning in general. It will be of interest to legal scholars but also to argumentation and reasoning theorists who want to keep abreast of the most recent developments in the field.”\u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e—Hans V. Hansen,University of Windsor\u003c\/p\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003cp\u003e“Walton makes a significant contribution to the understanding of legal argumentation and to the concept of relevance in evidence law. He goes beyond formal logic and adds an analysis of abduction and plausible inference to fill gaps in what a deductive system can accomplish. The resulting theory provides an important insight into the relationships among the steps of a legal argument. The dialogue structure on which it is based should prove to be of great value in understanding strategy, either for the advocate, the evaluator of evidence, or the student of the legal process.”\u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e—Kevin Saunders,University of Oklahoma Law School\u003c\/p\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003cp\u003e“Impressively researched and clearly written, this book is a notable contribution to the study of legal argumentation.”\u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e—Derek Allen \u003ci\u003eUniversity of Toronto Quarterly\u003c\/i\u003e\u003c\/p\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003cb\u003eTable of Contents\u003c\/b\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eContents\u003c\/strong\u003e\u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAcknowledgments \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIntroduction \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e1.  SPECIAL FEATURES OF ARGUMENTATION IN A\u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eLEGAL SYSTEM \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eLegal Rules and Particular Cases \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eInterpretation of Statutes and Documents \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eStages of a Trial \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eCivil Law, Criminal Law, and Burden of Proof \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eEvidence \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eRelevance and Admissibility \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eTestimony of Witnesses \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eExpert Testimony \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eExamination \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eDependence on Precedents \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e2. FORMS OF ARGUMENT COMMONLY USED IN LAW \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eArgument from Analogy \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eArgument from an Established Rule \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eArgument from Sign and Abductive Argument \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eArgument from Position to Know \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eArgument from Verbal Classification \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eArgument from Commitment \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003ePractical Reasoning \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eArgument from Personal Attack (\u003ci\u003eAd Hominem \u003c\/i\u003eArgument) \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe Slippery Slope Argument \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eOther Important Forms of Argument \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e3. CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe McCormick Criterion \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe Jewish Classical Law Criterion \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eBentham on Circumstantial Evidence \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003ePatterson’s Criterion \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eWigmore on Direct Evidence and Autoptic Proference \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eWigmore on Circumstantial and Testimonial Evidence \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe Hope Head Case \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe Five Criteria Summarized \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eHow Useful is the Concept of Circumstantial Evidence? \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eLogical Difficulties of Circumstantial Evidence \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e4. PLAUSIBILITY AND PROBABILITY \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eA Third Type of Reasoning\u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003ePlausibility and Probability \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eWigmore on Logical Inference and Probative Value \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eLocke on Plausibility and Degrees of Assent \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eBentham on Plausibility and Evidence \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003ePlausibility and Casuistry \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003ePlausible Reasoning in the Ancient World\u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eCarneades’ Theory of Plausibility \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eCriteria and Applications of Carneades’ Theory \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eWhy the Neglect of Plausible Reasoning? \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e5. THE DIALECTICAL FRAMEWORK OF LEGAL\u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eARGUMENTATION \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eImplicature and Conversational Postulates \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eRational Persuasion in the Trial \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eNormative Models of Argumentation \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003ePersuasion Dialogue \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eOther Types of Dialogue \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003ePeirastic Dialogue and Extastic Dialogue \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eRelevance and Dialectical Shifts \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe Fair Trial and the Witch-Hunt \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eA Dialectical Theory of Statutory Interpretation \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eArgumentation Schemes, Fallacies, and Legal Logic \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e6. A PLAUSIBILISTIC THEORY OF EVIDENCE \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eComponents of the New Theory \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eEvidence and Argument \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe Probative Function \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAncient Roots of the New Theory \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAdvantages of The Plausibilistic Theory \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eScientific Evidence\u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eLogical and Legal Relevance \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eLegal Evidence, Credibility, and Plausibility \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eExpert Testimony as Evidence \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eProblems and Conclusions \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e7. RELEVANCE IN PERSUASION DIALOGUE \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003ePersuasion Dialogue \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eChaining of Arguments \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eRules of Dialogue and Fallacies \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe Fallacy of Irrelevant Conclusion \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe Method of Argument Extrapolation \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eTesting an Actual Example \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eHow the Method Should be Applied \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eQuestions Raised \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eApplication to Legal Cases \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eArguments and Explanations \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e8. MULTI-AGENT ARGUMENTATION AND CREDIBILITY \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eFormal Dialogue Systems in Logic \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe \u003ci\u003eAd Hominem \u003c\/i\u003eand \u003ci\u003eAd Verecundiam \u003c\/i\u003eFallacies\u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eLabeled Deductive Systems \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eMulti-Agent Systems \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAdding Agents to Formal Dialectical Structures \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eEvaluating Fallacies and Blunders \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eHow Should ‘Agent’ be Defined in Formal Dialectic? \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eDialectical Shifts and Relevance \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe Solution to the Problem \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eConclusions \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e9. HOW TO USE THE NEW METHOD \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe New Method \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eInference Forms and Critical Questions \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eArguments Depending on Testimony and Credibility \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eVerbal Arguments and Critical Questions \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe Trial as Persuasion Dialogue \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eArgument Diagramming \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe Formal Structure of Diagramming \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eFormalizing the New System \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe Subtleties of Peirastic Dialogue \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe Current Problems with Relevance \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eBibliography \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIndex \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003c\/p\u003e","brand":"Penn State University","offers":[{"title":"Default Title","offer_id":51534930018647,"sku":"9780271058351","price":44.96,"currency_code":"GBP","in_stock":true}],"thumbnail_url":"\/\/cdn.shopify.com\/s\/files\/1\/0817\/1739\/5799\/files\/9780271058351.jpg?v=1755858114","url":"https:\/\/bookcurl.com\/products\/legal-argumentation-and-evidence-9780271058351","provider":"Book Curl","version":"1.0","type":"link"}