Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Law
Review: The Dialogical Roots Of Deduction: Historical, Cognitive, And Philosophical Perspectives On Reasoning, Brian N. Larson
Review: The Dialogical Roots Of Deduction: Historical, Cognitive, And Philosophical Perspectives On Reasoning, Brian N. Larson
Faculty Scholarship
The balance of this review addresses matters in the book that should be of particular interest to readers in the legal rhetoric and communication community. First, it addresses some concepts central to Dutilh Novaes’ effort. Second, it surveys the book’s organization, identifying some key observations and conclusions that she supports with careful evidence and argumentation. Third, it addresses Dutilh Novaes’ attention to non-European and non-Western research and logical traditions. Finally, it considers some difficult and technical passages, noting those readers should work through because the payoff is worth it and others I believe readers in our field might skip.
Endogenous And Dangerous, Brian N. Larson
Endogenous And Dangerous, Brian N. Larson
Faculty Scholarship
Empirical studies show that courts frequently cite cases that the parties did not cite during briefing and oral arguments—endogenous cases. This Article shows the cognitive and rational dangers of endogenous cases and presents an empirical study of their use. I contend that judges should avoid using endogenous cases in their reasoning and opinions. This Article’s first significant contribution is to provide the first exhaustive treatment in the American legal literature of the rational bases upon which defeasible legal deductions and legal analogies may be built and the critical questions or defeaters that can weaken or bring them down. As far …