Law Commons^™

The Improbability Of Positivism, Andrew Tutt

Pace Law Review

Ronald Dworkin’s contributions to legal philosophy have been subject to severe criticism in recent years. Other legal philosophers call his arguments “deflected or discredited,” laced with “philosophical confusions,” and “deeply embedded” mistakes. As Brian Leiter writes, “[t]he only good news in the story about Dworkin’s impact on law and philosophy is that most of the field declined to follow the Dworkinian path . . . .”

This Article endeavors to show that, far from an effort beset with primitive errors, Dworkin’s challenge to legal positivism in the opening pages of his seminal work was neither misguided nor trivial. Rather, Dworkin’s …

False Persuasion, Superficial Heuristics, And The Power Of Logical Form To Test The Integrity Of Legal Argument, Stephen M. Rice

Pace Law Review

This Article will generally describe philosophical logic, logical form, and logical fallacy. Further, it will explain one specific logical fallacy—the Fallacy of Negative Premises—as well as how courts have used the Fallacy of Negative Premises to evaluate legal arguments. Last, it will explain how lawyers, judges, and law students can use the Fallacy of Negative Premises to make and evaluate legal argument.