Abstract
The paper aims to present the legal theories of legal argumentation constructed in the last century, organised into two groups: the precursors (Viehweg, Perelman and Toulmin) and the authors of the standard theory (MacCormick and Alexy). Then, some criticisms about all these conceptions are presented. And finally, an outline of a theory of legal argumentation is made, capable of overcoming some of the previous criticisms. The fundamental idea for this is to build a very abstract concept of argumentation that could then allow various interpretations or conceptions of legal argumentation. From here, one would be in a position to find an answer to the three main argumentative questions raised by legal practice: how to analyse an argument, how to evaluate it, how to argue.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
But the interested reader can find them in the work mentioned above.
References
Atienza, Manuel. 1991. Las razones del Derecho. Teorías de la argumentación jurídica. Madrid: Centro de Estudios Constitucionales.
Atienza, Manuel. 2006. El Derecho como argumentación. Concepciones de la argumentación. Barcelona: Ariel.
Atienza, Manuel. 2013. Curso de argumentación jurídica. Madrid: Trotta.
Atienza, Manuel. 2015. Robert Alexy y el ‘giro argumentativo’ en la teoría del Derecho contemporánea. http://lamiradadepeitho.blogspot.com.es.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Atienza, M. What is the Theory Legal Argumentation For?. Int J Semiot Law 33, 147–153 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11196-019-09669-6
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11196-019-09669-6