Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Introduction: Dialectical legal argument: Formal and informal models

  • Published:
Artificial Intelligence and Law Aims and scope Submit manuscript

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Aleven, V. & Ashley, K.D. 1995. Doing Things with Factors. Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law, 31–41. New York: ACM Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bench-Capon, T.J.M. 1998. Specification and Implementation of Toulmin Dialogue Game. In J.C. Hage et al., (eds.) Legal Knowledge-Based Systems.JURIX: The Eleventh Conference. Nijmegen: Gerard Noodt Instituut (GNI), 5–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eemeren, F.H. van & Grootendorst, R. 1992. Argumentation, Communication, and Fallacies.A Pragma-dialectical Perspective. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eemeren, F.H. van, Grootendorst, R. & Snoeck Henkemans, F. (eds.) 1996. Fundamentals of Argumentation Theory: A Handbook of Classical Backgrounds and Contemporary Developments. Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feteris, E.T. 1996. The Analysis and Evaluation of Legal Argumentation from a Pragma-Dialectical Perspective. In D.M. Gabbay & H.J. Ohlbach (eds.) Practical Reasoning.International Conference on Formal and Applied Practical Reasoning, FAPR’ 96, Bonn, Germany, June 1996.Proceedings. Springer Lecture Notes in AI 1085, 151–166. Berlin: Springer Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, K. & Farley, A.M. 1996. A Model of Argumentation and its Application to Legal Reasoning. Artificial Intelligence and Law 4: 163–197.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gordon, T.F. 1995. The Pleadings Game.An Artificial Intelligence Model of Procedural Justice. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hage, J.C., Leenes, R.E. & Lodder, A.R. 1994. Hard Cases: A Procedural Approach. Artificial Intelligence and Law 2: 113–166.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kloosterhuis, H. 1996. The Normative Reconstruction of Analogy Argumentation in Judicial Decisions: A Pragma-Dialectical Perspective. In: D.M. Gabbay & H.J. Ohlbach (eds.) Practical Reasoning.International Conference on Formal and Applied Practical Reasoning, FAPR’ 96, Bonn, Germany, June 1996.Proceedings, Springer Lecture Notes in AI 1085, 375–383. Berlin: Springer Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leenes, R.E. 1999. Hercules of Karneades: Hard Cases in Recht en Rechtsinformatica (Hercules or Karneades: Hard Cases in Law and Legal Informatics). Doctoral dissertation University of Twente (in Dutch).

  • Lodder, A.R. 1998. DiaLaw.On Legal Justification and Dialog Games. Doctoral dissertation University of Maastricht. Also to appear in Kluwer's Law and Philosophy Library, 1999.

  • Loui, R.P. & Norman, J. 1995. Rationales and Argument Moves. Artificial Intelligence and Law 3: 159–189.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCarty, L.T. 1995. An Implementation of Eisner v. Macomber. Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law, 276–286. New York: ACM Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nitta, K. et al. 1995. New HELIC-II: A Software Tool for Legal Reasoning. Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law, 287–296. New York: ACM Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Plug, H.J. 1996. Complex Argumentation in Judicial Decisions. Analysing Conflicting Arguments. In D.M. Gabbay & H.J. Ohlbach (eds.) Practical reasoning.International Conference on Formal and Applied Practical Reasoning, FAPR’ 96, Bonn, Germany, June 1996.Proceedings. Springer Lecture Notes in AI 1085, 464–479. Berlin: Springer Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prakken, H. & Sartor, G. 1996. A Dialectical Model of Assessing Conflicting Arguments in Legal Reasoning. Artificial Intelligence and Law 4: 331–368.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prakken, H. & Sartor, G. 1997. Reasoning with Precedents in a Dialogue Game. Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law, 1–9. New York: ACM Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prakken, H. & Sartor, G. 1998. Modelling Reasoning with Precedents in a Formal Dialogue Game. Artificial Intelligence and Law 6: 231–287.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prakken, H. & Vreeswijk, G. 1999. Logical Systems for Defeasible Argumentation. To appear in D. Gabbay (ed.), Handbook of Philosophical Logic, second edition. Dordrecht: Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rissland, E.L. & Ashley, K.D. 1987. A Case-Based System for Trade Secrets Law. Proceedings of the First International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law, 60–66. New York: ACM Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rissland, E.L. & Skalak, D.B. 1991. CABARET: Statutory Interpretation in a Hybrid Architecture. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies 34, 839–887.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rissland, E.L., Skalak, D.B. & Friedman, M.T. 1997. Evaluating a Legal Argument Program: The BankXXX Experiments. Artificial Intelligence and Law 5: 1–73.

    Google Scholar 

  • Suber, P. 1990. The Paradox of Self-amendment: a Study of Logic, Law, Omnipotence, and Change. New York: Peter Lang.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walton, D.N. 1997. The New Dialectic: Conversational Contexts of Argument. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walton, D.N. & Krabbe, E.C.W. 1995. Commitment in Dialogue.Basic Concepts of Interpersonal Reasoning. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Speech Communication, University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands

    Eveline Feteris

  2. Department of Computer Science, Utrecht University, The Netherlands

    Henry Prakken

Authors
  1. Eveline Feteris
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Henry Prakken
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Feteris, E., Prakken, H. Introduction: Dialectical legal argument: Formal and informal models. Artificial Intelligence and Law 8, 107–113 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008379702360

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008379702360

Keywords

Search

Navigation