BmLIOGRAPHY Aarnio, A. (1977). On legal reasoning. Turku: Turon Yliopisto. Aarnio, A. (1978). Legal point of view. Six essays on legal philosophy. Helsinki (translated from the Finnish by Jyrki Uusitalo). Aarnio, A. (1979). Denkweisen der Rechtswissenschaft. WieniNew York: Springer. Aarnio, A. (1979). 'Linguistic philosophy and legal theory. Some problems of legal argumentation'. In: Krawietz et al. (eds.), pp. 17·41. Aarnio, A. (1981). 'On truth and the acceptability of interpretative propositions in legal dogmatics'. In: Aarnio, Niiniluoto, Uusitalo (eds.), pp. 33·52. Aarnio, A. (1983). 'Argumentation theory - and beyond. Some remarks on the rationality of legal justification'. Rechtstheorie, Vol. 14, No.4, pp. 385-400. Aarnio, A. {1987}. The rational as reasonable. A treatise of legal justification. Dordrecht etc.: Reidel. Aarnio, A. (1991). 'Statutory interpretation in Finland'. In: MacCormick, Summers (eds.), pp. 123·170. Aarnio, A, R. Alexy, A. Peczenik (1981). 'The foundation of legal reasoning'. Rechtstheorie, Band 21, No.2, pp. 133·158, No.3, pp. 257·279, No.4, pp. 423-448. Aarnio, A., I. Niiniluoto,J. Uusitalo (eds.) (1981).MethodologieundErkenntnistheone der juristischen A rgumentation. Berlin: Duncker & Humblot. Alexy, R. (1978). Theone der juristischen Argumentation. Die Theone des rationalen Diskunes als Theone der juristischen BegrUndung. Frankfurt a.M.: Suhrkamp. (Second edition 1991 with a reaction to critics) Alexy, R. (1979a). 'Aarnio, Perelman und Wittgenstein. Einige Bemerkungen zu Aulis Aamios Begriff der Rationalitat der juristischen argumentation'. In: Peczenik, Uusitalo {eds.}, pp. 121·139. Alexy, R. {1979b}. 'Zum Begriff des Rechtsprinzips'. In: Krawietz et al. (eds.), pp. 68·87. Alexy, R. (1980a). Rechtstheone, Band 11, No.2, pp. 120-128. Review of N. MacCormick, Legal reasoning and legal theory, 1978. Alexy, R. (1980b). 'Die logische Analyse juristischer Entscheidungen'. In: Hassemer et al. (eds.), pp. 181·212. Alexy, R. (1981). 'Die Idee einer prozeduralen Theorie der juristischen Argumen· tation'. In: Aamio, Niiniluoto, Uusitalo (eds.), pp. In·188. Alexy, R. {1989}. A theory of legal argumentation. The theory of rational discoune as theory of legal justification. Oxford: darendon press. (Translation of: Theone der juristischen A rgumentation. Die Theone des rationalen Diskunes als Theone der juristischen BegrUndung. Frankfurt a.M.: Suhrkamp, 1978). Alexy, R. (1990). 'Juristische Begriindung, System und Koharenz'. In: O. Behrends, M. Diesselhorst, R. Dreier (eds.) , Rechtsdogmatik und praktische Vemunft. Gottingen: VandenHoeck & Ruprecht, pp. 95·107. Alexy, R. (1990). 'Problems of discursive rationality in law'. Archiv for Rechts· und Sozialphilosophie, Vol. 42, pp. 174-179. 205
21
Embed
Denkweisen der - Springer978-94-015-9219-2/1.pdf · 206 BIBLIOGRAPHY Alexy, R. (1991). Theorie der juristischen Argumentation. Die Theorie des rationaien Diskurses ais Theorie der
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
BmLIOGRAPHY
Aarnio, A. (1977). On legal reasoning. Turku: Turon Yliopisto. Aarnio, A. (1978). Legal point of view. Six essays on legal philosophy. Helsinki (translated from the Finnish by Jyrki Uusitalo). Aarnio, A. (1979). Denkweisen der Rechtswissenschaft. WieniNew York: Springer. Aarnio, A. (1979). 'Linguistic philosophy and legal theory. Some problems of legal argumentation'. In: Krawietz et al. (eds.), pp. 17·41. Aarnio, A. (1981). 'On truth and the acceptability of interpretative propositions in legal dogmatics'. In: Aarnio, Niiniluoto, Uusitalo (eds.), pp. 33·52. Aarnio, A. (1983). 'Argumentation theory - and beyond. Some remarks on the rationality of legal justification'. Rechtstheorie, Vol. 14, No.4, pp. 385-400. Aarnio, A. {1987}. The rational as reasonable. A treatise of legal justification. Dordrecht etc.: Reidel. Aarnio, A. (1991). 'Statutory interpretation in Finland'. In: MacCormick, Summers (eds.), pp. 123·170. Aarnio, A, R. Alexy, A. Peczenik (1981). 'The foundation of legal reasoning'. Rechtstheorie, Band 21, No.2, pp. 133·158, No.3, pp. 257·279, No.4, pp. 423-448. Aarnio, A., I. Niiniluoto,J. Uusitalo (eds.) (1981).MethodologieundErkenntnistheone der juristischen A rgumentation. Berlin: Duncker & Humblot. Alexy, R. (1978). Theone der juristischen Argumentation. Die Theone des rationalen Diskunes als Theone der juristischen BegrUndung. Frankfurt a.M.: Suhrkamp. (Second edition 1991 with a reaction to critics) Alexy, R. (1979a). 'Aarnio, Perelman und Wittgenstein. Einige Bemerkungen zu Aulis Aamios Begriff der Rationalitat der juristischen argumentation'. In: Peczenik, Uusitalo {eds.}, pp. 121·139. Alexy, R. {1979b}. 'Zum Begriff des Rechtsprinzips'. In: Krawietz et al. (eds.), pp. 68·87. Alexy, R. (1980a). Rechtstheone, Band 11, No.2, pp. 120-128. Review of N. MacCormick, Legal reasoning and legal theory, 1978. Alexy, R. (1980b). 'Die logische Analyse juristischer Entscheidungen'. In: Hassemer et al. (eds.), pp. 181·212. Alexy, R. (1981). 'Die Idee einer prozeduralen Theorie der juristischen Argumen· tation'. In: Aamio, Niiniluoto, Uusitalo (eds.), pp. In·188. Alexy, R. {1989}. A theory of legal argumentation. The theory of rational discoune as theory of legal justification. Oxford: darendon press. (Translation of: Theone der juristischen A rgumentation. Die Theone des rationalen Diskunes als Theone der juristischen BegrUndung. Frankfurt a.M.: Suhrkamp, 1978). Alexy, R. (1990). 'Juristische Begriindung, System und Koharenz'. In: O. Behrends, M. Diesselhorst, R. Dreier (eds.) , Rechtsdogmatik und praktische Vemunft. Gottingen: VandenHoeck & Ruprecht, pp. 95·107. Alexy, R. (1990). 'Problems of discursive rationality in law'. Archiv for Rechts· und Sozialphilosophie, Vol. 42, pp. 174-179.
205
206 BIBLIOGRAPHY
Alexy, R. (1991). Theorie der juristischen Argumentation. Die Theorie des rationaien Diskurses ais Theorie der juristischen Begrundung. (Second edition with a reaction to critics) Frankfurt a.M.: Suhrkamp. Alexy, R., A. Peczenik (1990). 'The concept of coherence and its significance for discursive Rationality'. Ratio Juris, Vol. 3, Nr. 1, pp. 130-147. T. Anderson, W. Twining (1991). Analysis of evidence. Boston and London: Butterworths. Angeles, P.A., (1981). Dictionary of philosophy. New York etc.: Barnes & Noble Asbell Sheppard, S., R.D. Rieke (1983). 'Categories of reasoning in legal argument'. In: Zarefsky et al. (eds.), pp. 235-250. Atienza, M. (1990). 'For a theory of legal argumentation'. Rechtstheorie, Band 21, pp. 393-414. Atiyah, P.S., R.S. Summers (1987). Form and substance in Anglo·American law. A comparative study of legal reasoning, legal theory and legal institutions. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Ballweg, O. (1982). 'Phronetik, Semiotik undRhetorik'. In: Ballweg, Seibert (eds.), pp.27-71. Ballweg, 0., T.M. Seibert (eds.) (1982). RhetorischeRechtstheorie. Zum 75. Geburtstag von Theodor Viehweg. Freiburg etc.: K. Alber. Benoit, W.L. (1981). 'An empirical investigation of argumentative strategies employed in Supreme Court opinions'. In: Ziegelmueller, Rhodes (eds.), pp. 179-196. Benoit, W.L. (1989). 'Attorney argumentation and Supreme Court opinions'. In: Argumentation and Advocacy, Vol. 26, No.1, pp. 22-38. Benoit, W.L., J.S. France (1980). 'Analogical reasoning in legal argumentation'. In: Rhodes and Newell (eds.), pp. 48-60. Bickenbach,J.E. (1990). 'The "artificial reason" ofthe law'. Informal Logic, Vol. 12, No.1, p. 23-32. Brouwer, P.W., T. HoI, A. Soeteman, W.G. van der Velden, A.H. de Wild (eds.) (1992). Coherence and Conflict in Law. Proceedings of the 3rd Benelux-Scandinavian Symposium in legal theory. Amsterdam,January 3-5,1991, Zwolle: Tjeenk Willink. Buchanan, R.W. (1987). 'The American jury trial: the art of argument in voir dire and opening statements'. In: Van Eemeren et al. (eds.), pp. 131-141. Bund, E. (1983). Juristische Logik und Argumentation. Freiburg: Rombach. Burton, S.J. (1985). An introduction to law and legal reasoning. Boston/Toronto: Little, Brown. Canaris, C. W. (1969). Systemdenken und Systembegri/J in der Jurisprudenz, entwickelt am Beispliel des deutschen Privatrechts. Berlin: Duncker & Humblot. Carter, L.H. (1984). Reason in law. (fourth edition) Boston/Toronto: Little, Brown. Christie, G.C. (1993). 'The universal audience and the law'. In: Haarscher (ed.), pp. 43-68. Clemens, Ch. (1977). Strukturen juristischer Argumentation. Berlin: Duncker & Humblot. Copi, I. (and C. Cohen) (1990). Introduction to logic, New York: Macmillan (eighth edition). Dellapenna, j.W., K.M. Farrell (1987). 'Modes of judicial discourse: the search for argument fields'. In: van Eemeren et al. (eds.), pp. 94-101.
BIBLIOGRAPHY 207
Dicks, V.I. (1976). 'Courtroom controversy: A stasis/stock issue analysis of the Angela Davis trial'. Journal of the American Forensic Association, Vol. 13, pp. 77-83. Dicks, V.1. (1981). 'Courtroom rhetorical strategies: forensic and deliberative perspectives'. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 67, pp. 178-192. Dickens, M., R.E. Schwartz (1971). 'Oral argument before the Supreme Court: Marshall v. Davis in the school segregation cases'. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 57, pp.32-42. Dunbar, N., M. Cooper (1981). 'A situational perspective for the study of legal argument. A case study of Brown v. Board of education'. In: Ziegelmueller and Rhodes (eds.), pp. 213-241. Dworkin, R. (1977). Taking rights seriously. Cambridge (Mass.): Harvard University Press. Dworkin, R. (1986). Law's empire. London: Fontana. Eemeren, F.H. van, (1987). 'Argumentation studies' five estates'. In: Wenze! (ed.), pp.9-24. Eemeren, F.H. van, R. Grootendorst (1984). Speech acts in argumentative discussions. Dordrecht: Foris. Eemeren, F.H. van, R. Grootendorst (1992). Argumentation, communication, and fallacies. A pragma.dialectical perspective. Hillsdale NJ: Erlbaum. Eemeren, F.H. van, R. Grootendorst, F. Snoeck Henkemans (1996). Fundamentals of argumentation theory. Mahwah (N.J).: Erlbaum. Eemeren, F.H. van, R. Grootendorst, S. Jackson, S. Jacobs (1993). Reconstructing argumentative discourse. Tuscaloosa (AL): University of Alabama Press. Eemeren, F.H. van, R. Grootendorst, J.A. Blair, C.A. Willard (eds.) (1987). Argumentation: Analysis and practices. Proceedings of the conference on argumentation 1986. Dordrecht: Foris. Eemeren, F.H. van, R. Grootendorst, J.A. Blair, C.A. Willard (eds.) (1991). Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Argumentation, Amsterdam: Sicsat. Eemeren, F.H. van, R. Grootendorst, ].A. Blair, C.A. Willard (eds.) (1995). Proceedings of the Third International Conference on A rgumentation, Amsterdam: Sicsat. Eemeren, F.H. van, E.T. Feteris, R. Grootendorst, T. van Haaften, W. den Harder, H. Kloosterhuis, ]. Plug (1996). Argumenteren voor juristen. Het analyseren en schrijven van juridische betogen en beleidsteksten. (A rgumentation for lawyers) (third edition, first edition 1987) Groningen: Wolters-Noordhoff. Ehrlich, E. (1925). Die juristische Logik. Tiibingen: Aalen. Engisch, K. (1956). EinfUhrung in das juristische Denken. Stuttgart etc.: Urban. Engisch, K. (1960). Logische Studien zur Gesetzesanwendung. Heidelberg: Winter. Enos, R.L. (1980). 'Emerging notions of argument and advocacy in Hellenic litigation: Antiphon's "On the murder of Herodes"'. Journal of the American Forensic Association, Vol. 17, p. 182-191. Esser, J. (1979). Juristisches Argumentieren im Wandel des Rechtsjindungskonzepts unseres Jahrhunderts. Heidelberg: Winter. Feteris, E.T. (1987) 'The dialectical role of the judge in a Dutch legal process'. In: Wenzel (ed.), pp. 335-339.
208 BIBLIOGRAPHY
Feteris, E.T. (1989). Discussieregels in het recht. Een pragma-dialectische analyse van het burgerlijk proces en het strafproces. (Rules for discussion in law. A pragma-dialectical analysis of the Dutch civil process and criminal process). Dordrecht: Foris. Feteris, E.T. (1990). 'Conditions and rules for rational discussion in a legal process: A pragma-dialectical perspective'. Argumentation and Advocacy. Journal of the American Forensic Association. Vol. 26, No.3, pp. 108-117. Feteris, E. T. (1991). 'Normative reconstruction oflegal discussions'. In: van Eemeren et al. (eds.), pp. 768-775. Feteris, E.T. (1993a). 'The judge as a critical antagonist in a legal process: a pragmadialectical perspective'. In: R.E. McKerrow (ed.), Argument and the Postmodern Challenge. Proceedings of the eighth SCA/AFA Conference on argumentation. Annandale: Speech Communication Association, pp. 476-480. Feteris, E.T. (1993b). 'Rationality in legal discussions: A pragma-dialectical perspective'. Informal Logic, Vol. XV, No.3, pp. 179-188. Feteris, E.T. (1994). 'Recent developments in legal argumentation theory: dialectical approaches to legal argumentation'. International Journal for the Semiotics of lAw, Vol. VIT, No. 20, pp. 134-153. Feteris, E.T. (1995). 'The analysis and evaluation of legal argumentation from a pragma-dialectical perspective'. In: van Eemeren et al. (eds.), Vol. IV, pp. 42-51. 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, F APR '96. Bonn, June 1996. Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence. Berlin etc.: Springer, pp. 151-463. Feteris, E. T. (1997). 'The analysis and evaluation of argumentation in Dutch criminal proceedings from a pragma-dialectical perspective'. In: J.F. Nijboer, J.M. Reijntjes (eds') , Proceedings of the First World Conference on New Trends in Criminal Investigation and Evidence. Lelystad: Koninklijke Vermande, pp. 57-62. Feteris, E.T. (1998a). 'The soundness of 'pragmatic' or 'consequentialist' argumentation: does the end justify the means?'. In: H. Hansen and C. Tindale (eds') , Proceedings of the OSSA Conference on A rgumentation and Rhetoric, Brock University, May 15-17 1997. Feteris, E.T. (1998b). 'What went wrong in the ballpoint case? An argumentative anlaysis and evaluation of the discussion in the ballpoint case'. In: J.F. Nijboer (ed.). Hard cases in criminal evidence. Feteris, E.T., J. Schuetz (eds.) (1995). Faces of North American and European legal argument. Argumentation, Vol. 9, No.5. Feteris, E.T., H. Kloosterhuis, H.J. Plug, ].A. Pontier (eds.) (1994). Met redenen omkleed. Bijdragen aan het symposium juridische argumentatie, Rotterdam 11 juni 1993. Nijmegen: Ars Aequi. Feteris, E. T., H. Kloosterhuis, H.J. Plug, J .A. Pontier (eds.) (1997). Op goede gronden. Bijdragen aan het tweede symposium juridische argumentatie, Rotterdam 14 juni 1996. Nijmegen: Ars Aequi. Fiedler, H. (1966). 'Juristische Logik im mathematischerSicht. Einige Bemerkungen und Beispiele: Archiv fur Rechts- und Sozialphilosophie, Band 52, pp. 93-116.
BIBLIOGRAPHY 209
Fuller, L.L. (1969). The morality of law. (First edition 1964) New Haven/London: Yale University Press. Fuller, L.L. (1972). 'The justification of legal decisions'.ln: DieJuristische Argumen· tation, pp. 77·92. Gamut, L.T.F. (1991). Logic, Language, and Meaning. Chicago/London: University of Chicago Press. Golden, J.L., J. J. Pilotta (eds.) (1986). Practical reasoning in human affairs. Studies in honor of Chaim Perelman. Dordrecht etc.: Reidel. Golding, M.P. (1984). Legal reasoning. New York: Knopf. Gottlieb, G. (1968). The logic of choice. An investigation of the concepts of rule and rationality. London: George Allen & Unwin. Gronbeck, B.E. (ed.) (1989). Spheres of argument. Proceedings of the sixth SCA/AFA conference on argumentation. Annandale 01 A): SCA. Giinther, K. (1989). 'Ein normativer Begriff der Koharenz. Fur eine Theorie der juristischen Argumentation'. Rechtstheone, Band 20, pp. 163·190. Haack, S. (1978). Philosophy of Logics. Cambridge etc.: Cambridge University Press. Haarscher, G. (1993). Chaim Perelman et la pensee contemporaine. Brussels: Bruylant. Habermas, J. (1971). 'Theorie der Gesellschaft onder Sozialtechnologie? Eine Auseinandersetzung mit Niklas Luhmann'. In: J. Habermas and N. Luhmann, Theone der Gesellschaft oder Sozialtechnologie? Frankfun a.M.: Suhrkamp, pp. 101· 14l. Habermas (1973). 'Wahrheitstheorieen.' In: H. Fahrenbach (ed.), Wirklichkeit und Reflexion. Pfullingen, pp. 211·265. Habermas, J. (1981). Theone des kommunikativen Handelns. Frankfun a.M.: Suhrkamp. Habermas, J. (1983). Moralbewusstsein und Kommunikatives Handeln. Frankfun a.M.: Suhrkamp. Habermas, J. (1984). Vorstudien und Erganzungen zur Theone des Kommunikativen Handelns. Frankfurt a.M.: Suhrkamp. Habermas, J. (1988). Recht und Moral. Zwei Vorlesungen. Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press. Habermas, J. (1988). The Tanner Lectures on human values, Vol. 8. Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press. Habermas, J. (1990), Moral consciousness and communicative action. (Translation of Moralbesusstsein und kommunikatives Handeln, 1983) Cambridge (Mass): The MIT Press. Habermas, J. (1992). Faktiziziit und Geltung. Beitrage zur Diskurstheorie des Rechts und des demokratischen Rechtsstaats. Frankfun a.M.: Suhrkamp. Haft, F. (1981). Juristische Rhetonk. Freiburg etc.: Alber. Hagan, M.R. (1976). 'Roe v. Wade: the rhetoric of fetal life'. Central States Speech Journal, Vol. 27, No.3, pp. 192·199. Hage, J.e. (1991). 'Monological reason based logic'. In: J.A. Breuker (ed.), Legal knowledge based systems, model based reasoning. Lelystad: Koninklijke Vermande, pp. 77·91. Hage, J.e., R. Leenes, A.R. Lodder (1994). 'Hard cases: a procedural approach'. Artificial intelligence and law, (2), pp. 113·167.
210 BIBLIOGRAPHY
Hage, J.C., G.P.J. Span and A.R. Lodder (1992). 'A dialogical model of legal reasoning', In: C.A.F.M. Griitters et al. (eds.) , Legal knowledge based systems, information technology and law. JURIX '92, Lelystad: Koninklijke Vermande, pp. 135-146. Hample, D. (1979). 'Motives in law: An adaptation of legal realism'. Journal of the American Forensic Association, Vol. 15, No.3, pp. 156-154. Hare, R.M. (1963). Freedom and reason. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Han, H.L.A. (1958). 'Positivism and the separation of law and morals'. Harvard Law Review, pp. 71 ff. Han, H.L.A. (1961). The concept of law. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Han, H.L.A. (1972). 'Problems of philosophy of law'. In: P. Edwards (ed.), The encyclopedia of philosophy. Volume 5/6. New York/London: Macmillan, pp. 264-276. Hassemer, W. (1972). 'Juristische Argumentationstheorie und juristische Didaktik'. In: Alben et al. (eds.), Rechtstheorie als Grundlagenwissenschaft der Rechtswissenschaft. Dusseldorf: Benelsmann, pp. 467-480. Hassemer, W., A. Kaufmann, U. Neumann (eds.) (1980). Argumentation und Recht. Archiv fur Rechts- und Sozialphilosophie, Beiheft Neue Folge Nr. 14. Wiesbaden: F. Steiner. Henket, M. (1987). 'Ne bis in idem and related princples'. In: van Eemeren et al. (eds.), pp. 123-130. Henket, M. (1991). 'Analogy and rules in practical reasoning'. In: van Eemeren et al. (eds.), pp. 790-800. Henket, M. (1992). 'On the logical analysis of judicial decisions'. International Journal for the Semiotics of Law, Vol. v, No. 14, pp. 152-164. Henket, M.M., P.J. van den Hoven (1990). Juridische vaardigheden in argumentatief verband. (Legal skills in an argumentative context) Groningen: Wolters-Noordhoff. Herbeck, D.A. (1995a). 'Cricial Legal Studies and argumentation theory'. A rgumen· tation, Vol. 9, No.5, pp. 719-729. Herbeck, D.A. (1995b). 'The problems of jurisprudence and argumentation theory'. In: van Eemeren et al., Vol. IV, pp. 3-13. Herberger M., D. Simon (1989). Wissenschaftstheoriefur Juristen. Frankfun a.M.: Metzner. Hohmann, H. (1991). 'Fallacies and legal argumentation'. In: van Eemeren et al. (eds.), pp. 776-781. Hohmann, H. (1995). 'Logic and rhetoric in legal argumentation: Some medieval perspectives'. In: F.H. van Eemeren et al. (eds.), Vol. IV, pp. 14-30. Hollihan, T.A., P. Riley, K. Freadhoff (1986). 'Arguing for justice: an analysis of arguing in small claims coun'. Journal of the A merican Forensic Association, Vol. 22, No.4, pp. 187-195. Hom, N. (1967). 'Zur Bedeutung der Topiklehre Theodor Viehwegs rur eine einheitliche Theorie des juristischen Denkens'. Neue Juristische Wochenschrift, pp. 601-608. Horovitz, J. (1972). Law and logic. A critical account of legal argument. Wien etc.: Springer. Hoven, P.J. van den (1988). 'Rechtszekerheid, rechtvaardigheid, verstaanbaarheid'. Tijdschrift voor Taalbeheersing, Vol. 10, No.3, pp. 209-219.
BIBLIOGRAPHY 211
llie, C. (1995). 'The validity of rhetorical questions as arguments in the courtroom'. In: van Eemeren et al., Vol. IV, pp. 73-88. Jackson, B. S. (1988). Law,fact and narrative coherence. Roby, Merweyside: Deborah Charles. Janas, M. (1995). 'Structure, aesthetics, rhetoric and Posner's theory of justice'. In: van Eemeren et al., Vol. IV, pp. 97-110. Jansen, H. (1996). 'De beoordeling van a contrario-argumentatie' (The evaluation of a contrario argumentation). Tijdschrift voor Taalbeheersing, Vol. 18, pp. 240-254. Jansen, H. (1997). 'Voorwaarden voor aanvaardbare a contrario argumentatie (Conditions for sound a contrario argumentation),. In: E.T. Feteris et al. (eds.), pp. 123-130. Jensen, J.c. (1957). 'The nature of legal argument. Oxford: Blackwell. Jones, S.B. (1976). 'Justification in judicial opinions: A case study'. Journal of the American Forensic Association, Vol. 12, pp. 121-129. Jonsen, A.R., S. Toulmin (1988). 'The abuse of casuistry. Berkeley etc.: University of California Press. Die juristische Argumentation (1972). Wiesbaden: F. Steiner. Kahane, H. (1978). Logic and philosophy. A modern introduction. (third edition) Belmont: Wadsworth. Kalinowski, G. (1972). La logique des normes. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France. Kamenka, E., A. Erh-Soon Tay (1993). 'The law as reasonable: applying Perelman's dictum to common law and to continental civiIlaw'. In: Haarscher (ed.) , pp. 167-178. Kaptein, H. (1994). 'E contrario arguments in law: From interpretation to implicit premisses'. International Journal for the Semiotics of Law, Vol. VI, No. 18, pp. 315-324. Kaptein, H. (1995). 'The redundancy of precedent and analogy'. In: van Eemeren et al., Vol. IV, pp. 122-137. Kelsen, H. (1960). Reine Rechtslehre. (second edition, first edition 1934). Wien. Kilian, W. (1974). Juristische Entscheidung und elektronische Datenverarbeitung. Frankfurt a.M.: Beitrage zur juristischen Informatik 3. Klinger, G. (1989). 'Rhetoric's wide-angle lense: How legal vision can be enhanced with rhetorical glasses'. In: Grondbeck (ed.), pp. 359-363. Kloosterhuis, H. (1994). 'Analysing analogy argumentation in judicial decisions'. In: F.H. van Eemeren and R. Grootendorst (eds.) , Studies in Pragma-dialectics. Amsterdam: SicSat, pp. 238-245. Kloosterhuis, H. (1995). 'The study of analogy argumentation in law: four pragmadialectical starting points'. In: van Eemeren et. al., Vol. IV, pp. 138-145. Kloosterhuis, H. (1996). 'The normative reconstruction of analogy argumentation in judicial decisions: a pragma-dialectical perspective'. In: D.M. Gabbay, H.J. Ohlbach (eds.), Proceedings of the International Conference on Formal and Applied Practical Reasoning. Berlin: Springer, pp. 375·383. Klug, U. (1951). Juristische Logik. Berlin: Springer. Klug, U. (1982). Juristische Logik (fourth revised edition). Berlin: Springer. Koch, H.J. (1980). 'Das Frankfurter Projekt zur juristischen Argumentation: Zur Rehabilitation desdeduktiven Begriindens juristischer Entscheidungen' . In: Hassemer et al. (eds.), pp. 59-86.
212 BIBLIOGRAPHY
Kominar, R.A. (1995). 'Beyond the fmal court of apeal: Getting legal reasoning right in the common law'. In: van Eemeren et al. (eels.), pp. 146-151. Krawietz, W. (1984). 'Juridisch-institutionelle Rationalitat des Rechts versus Rationalitat der Wissenschaften'. Rechtstheorie, Vol. 15, pp. 423-452. Krawietz, W., R. Alexy (eels.) (1983). Metatheorie juristischer Argumentation. Berlin: Duncker & Humblot. Krawietz, W., K. Opalek, A. Peczenik, A. Schramm (eels.) (1979). Argumentation und Hermeneutik in tier Jurisprudenz. Berlin: Duncker & Humblot. Larenz, K. (1975). Methodenlehre der Rechtswissenschaft. Berlin etc.: Springer. Lempereur, A. (eel.) (1991). Legal argument. Argumentation, Vol. 5, No.3. Levi, E.H. (1949). An introduction to legal reasoning. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Ling, D.A. (1981). 'Policy advocacy in the legal setting: A case analysis'. In: Ziegelmueller and Rhodes (eels.), pp. 196-206. Luebke, S.W. (1995). 'Informal logic issues in practical testing context'. In: van Eemeren et al., Vol. IV, pp. 31-41. Lorenzen, P., O. Schwemmer (1973). Konstruktive Logik, Ethik und Wissenschaftstheorie. Mannheim etc. MacCormick, N. (1978). Legal reasoning and legal theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press. MacCormick, N. (1981). 'The artificial reason and judgement of law'. In: Aarnio, Niiniluoto, Uusitalo (eels.), pp. 105-120. MacCormick, N. (1984). 'Coherence in legal justification'. In: Peczenik et al. (eels.), pp. 235-252. MacCormick, N. (1992). 'Legal deduction, legal predicates and expert systems'. International Journal for the Semiotics of Law, Vol. V, No. 14, pp. 181-202. MacCormick, D.N., R.S. Summers (eels.) (1991). Interpreting statutes. A comparative study. Aldershot etc.: Dartmouth. McEvoy, S.T. (1991). 'Issues in Common Law pleading and ancient rhetoric'. Argumentation, Vol. 5, No.3, pp. 245-262. McEvoy, S.T. (1995). 'The construction of issues: Pleading theory and practice, relevance in pragmatics, and the confrontation stage in the pragma-dialectical theory of argumentation'. In: Van Eemeren et al., Vol. IV, pp. 52-60. Makau, J.M. (1984). 'The Supreme Court and reasonableness'. Quarterly Journal of Speech, Vol. 70, pp. 379-396. Maneli, M. (1993). Perelman's New Rhetoric as philospby and methodology for the next century. Dordrecht etc.: Kluwer. Matlon, R.J. (1988). Communication in the legal process. New York etc.: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. Matlon, R.J. (ed.) (1994). Legal communication. Argumentation and Advocacy. Vol. 30, No.4. Neumann, U. (1986) .Juristische A rgumentationstheorie. Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft. Neumann, U., J. Rahlf, E. von Savigny (1976). Juristische Dogmatik und Wis· senschaftstheorie. Munchen: Beck.
BIBLIOGRAPHY 213
Newell, S.E., R.D. Rieke (1986). 'A practical reasoning approach to legal doctrine.' journal of the American Foremic Association, Vol. 22, No.4, pp. 212-222. Panetta, E., M. Hasian Jr. (1995). 'Sex, reason and economics: The judicial discourse of Richard A. Posner'. In: Van Eemeren et al., Vol. IV, pp. 111-121. Parker, R.A. (1987). 'Assessing judicial opinions: Ronald Dworkin's critical method'. In: Wenzel (ed.), pp. 325-334. Pavcnik, M. (1991). 'Interpretation as (re)productive act: interpretation of general legal acts in the process of their normative concretization'. In: van Eemeren et al. (eds.), pp. 765-767. Peczenik, A. (1978). Rechtstheorie, Vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 241-244. Review of A. Aarnio, Legal point of view, 1979. Peczenik, A. (1979). 'Non-equivalent transformations and the law'. In: Peczenik, Uusitalo (eds.), pp. 47-61. Peczenik, A. (1981). 'On the nature and function of the Grundnorm'. In: Aarnio, Niiniluoto, Uusitalo (eds.), pp. 279-298. Peczenik, A. (1983). The basis of legal justification. Lund. Peczenik, A. (1984a). 'Creativity and transformations in legal reasoning'. In: Krawietz et al. (eds.), pp. 277-298. Peczenik, A. (1984b). 'Legal data. An essay about the ontology of law'. In: Peczenik et al. (eds.), pp. 97-120. Peczenik, A. (1984c). 'Legal rationality and its limits'. Rechtstheorie, Vol. 15, pp. 415-422. Peczenik, A. (1985a). 'Moral and ontological justification of legal reasoning'. Law and Philosophy, Vol 4, pp. 289-309. Peczenik, A. (1985b). 'On the rational and moral basis of legal justification'. Archiv fur Rechts- und Sozialphilosophie, Vol. 71, pp. 263-267. Peczenik, A. (1988). 'Legal reasoning as a special case of moral reasoning'. Ratio Iuris. Peczenik, A. (1989).On law and reason. Dordrecht etc.: Reidel. (translation of 'Ratten oeh fornuttet', 1986). Peczenik, A. (1992a). 'Legal collision norms and moral considerations'. In: Brouwer et. al. (eds.), pp. 177-200 Peczenik, A. (1992b). 'Weighing values'. International journal for the Semiotics of Law, Vol. V, pp. 137-152. Peczenik, A. (ed.) (1986). Meaning, interpretation and the law. Tampere: Tieto. Peczenik, A., G. Bergholz (1991). 'Statutory interpretation in Sweden'. In: MacCormick and Summers (eds.), pp. 311-358. Peczenik, A., L. Lindahl, B. van Roermund (eds.) (1984). Theory of legal science. Proceedings of the conference on legal theory and philosophy of science, Lund, Sweden, December 11-14, 1983. Dordrecht etc.: Reidel. Peczenik, A., J. Uusitalo (eds.) (1979). Reasoning on legal reasoning. Vammala: Vammalan Kirjapaino Oy. Peczenik, A., J. Wroblewski (1985). 'Fuzziness and transformation. Towards explaining legal reasoning'. Theoria. Perelman, Ch. (1963). The idea of justice and the problem of argument. London: Routledge and Keagan Paul. Perelman, Ch. (1967). justice. New York: Random House.
214 BIBLIOGRAPHY
Perelman, Ch. (1976). Logique juridique. Nouvelle rhitorique. Paris: Dalloz. Perelman, Ch. (1980).Justice, law and argument. Essays on moral and legal reasoning. Dordrecht etc.: Reidel. Perelman, Ch., L. Olbrechts-Tyteca (1958). La nouvelle rhitorique. Traiti de I'argumentation. Brussels: l'Universite de Bruxelles. Perelman, Ch., L. Olbrechts-Tyteca (1969). The new rhetoric. A treatise on argumentation. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press. (English translation of La nouvelle rhitorique, 1958). Plug, J. (1994). 'Reconstructing complex argumentation in judicial decisions' . In: F.H. van Eemeren and R. Grootendorst (eds.), Studies in pragma-dialectics, Amsterdam: SicSat, pp. 246-254. Plug, J. (1995). 'The rational reconstruction of additional considerations in judicial decisions'. In: van Eemeren et al., Vol. IV, pp. 61-72. Plug, H.J. (1996). 'Complex argumentation in judicial decisions. Analysing conflicting arguments'. In: D.M. Gabbay, H.J. Ohlbach (eds.), Proceedings of the International Conference on Formal and Applied Practical Reasoning. Berlin: Springer, p. 464-479. Plumer, G. (1995). 'Testing for assumption recognition'. In: Van Eemeren et al., Vol. IV, pp. 152-160. Popper, K.R. (1970). 'Normal science and its dangers'. In: I. Lakathos, A. Musgrave (eds.) , Criticism and the growth of knowledge. Cambridge etc.: Cambridge University Press, pp. 51-58. Posner, R.A. (1988). Law and Literature: A misunderstood relation. Cambridge Mass.: Harvard University Press. Posner, R.A. (1990). The problems of jurisprudence. University of Chigago, Chicago Illinois. Posner, R.A. (1992). Sex and reason. Cambridge (Mass.): Harvard University Press. Prakken, H. (1993). Logical tools for modelling legal argument. Dissertation Amsterdam. Amsterdam. Prott, L.V. (1991). 'Argumentation in international law'. Argumentation, Vol. 5, No. 3, pp. 299-310. Rasmussen, D.M. (1990). Reading Habermas. Oxford: Blackwell. Raudenbusch Olmsted, W. (1991). 'The uses of rhetoric: indeterminacy in legal reasoning, practical thinking and the interpretation of literary figures'. Philosophy and Rhetoric, Vol. 24, No.1, pp. 1-24. Rawls, J. (1971). A theory ofjustice. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Raz, J. (1970). The concept of a legal system. An introduction to the theory of legal system. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Reichenbach, H. (1938). Experience and prediction: A n analysis of the foundations and the structure of knowledge. Chicago: Chicago University Press. Rescher, N. (1964). Introduction to logic. New York: St. Martin Press. Rieke, R.D. (1981). 'Investigating legal argument as a field' . In: Ziegelmueller, Rhodes (eds.), pp. 152-159. Rieke, R.D. (1986). 'The evolution of judicial justification: Perelman's concept of the rational and the reasonable'. In: Golden and Pilotta (eds.), pp. 227-244. Rieke, R.D. (1991). 'The judicial dialogue'. In: Argumentation, Vol. 5, No.1, pp. 39-56.
BIBLIOGRAPHY 215
Rieke, R.D. (1982). 'Argumentation in the legal process'. In: J.R. Cox and C.A. Willard (eds.), Advances in argumentation theory and research. Carbondale etc.: Southern Illinois University Press, pp. 363-376. Rieke, R.D. (1991). 'The judicial dialogue'. Argumentation, Vol. 5, No.1, pp. 39-56. Rieke, R.D., R.K. Stutman (1990). Communication in legal ddvocacy. Columbia S.C.: University of South Carolina Press. Riley, P., T.A. Hollihan, K.D. Freadhoff (1987}. 'Argument in the law: the special case of the small claims court'. In: van Eemeren et al. (eds.), pp. 142-151. Rodig, J. (1971). 'Kritik des normlogischen Schliessens'. Theory and Decision, 2, pp. 79-93. Rodig, J. (1972). 'Uber die Notwendigkeit einer besonderen Logik der Normen'. In: H. Albert, N. Luhmann, W. Maihofer, O. Weinberger (eds.), Rechtstheorie als Grundlagenwissenscha/t der Rechtswissenscha/t. J ahrbuch rur Rechtssoziologie und Rechtstheorie. Dusseldorf: Bertelsmann, pp. 163-185. Rodig, J. (1976). 'Logik und Rechtswissenschaft'. In: D. Grimm (ed.), Rechtswissenscha/t und Nachbarwissenscha/ten Volume 2. Munchen: C. Beck, pp. 53-79. Rohrer, D.M. (1981). 'Jurisprudential origins and applications of presumption and burden of proof'. In: Ziegelmueller and Rhodes (eds.), pp. 159-179. Rottleuthner, H. (1970). 'Zur Soziologie richterlichen Handelns'. Kritische Justiz , pp. 283-306. Rottleuthner (1973). Rechtswissenscha/tals Sozialwissenscha/t. Frankfurt a.M.: Fischer. Riissmann, H. (1979). Rechtstheorie, pp. 110-120. Review of R. Alexy, Theone der juristischen Argumentation, 1978. Russow, L.M., M. Curd (1988). Principles of reasoning. New York: St. Martin's Press. Salter, K.W. (1981). 'The functions of legal argumentation in pre-trial advocacy'. In: Ziegelmueller & Rhodes (eds.), pp. 268-279. Sankadu, E. (1993). 'L'influence de Ch. Perelman sur la pensee juridique au japon'. In: Haarscher (ed.), pp. 69-76. Savigny, E. von {1971}. 'Zur rolle der deduktiv-axiomatischen Methode in der Rechtswissenschaft'. In: G. J ahr & W. Maihofer (Hrsg.) Rechtstheorie. Frankfurt a.M. pp. 315-151. Savigny, E. von (1973). 'Topik und Axiomatik: eind verfehlte Alternative'. In: A rchiv fur Rechts- Und Sozialphilosophie, pp. 249999-254_ Scallen, E.A. (1995). 'American legal argumentation: The Law and Literature movement'. Argumentation, Vol. 9, No.5, pp. 705-717. Schreiner, H. (1976). 'Zur rechtslogischen Formalisierungen von Normen'. Archiv fur Rechts- und Sozialphilosophie, Band 62, pp. 365-380. Schuetz, J. (1981). 'The genesis of argumentative forms and fields'. In: Ziegelmueller and Rhodes (eds.), pp. 279-295. Schuetz, J. (1986). 'Overlays of argument in legislative process'. Journal of the American Forensic Association, Vol. 22, No.4, pp. 223-234. Schuetz, J. (1991). 'Perelman's rule of justice in Mexican appellate courtS'. In: van Eemeren et al. (eds.), pp. 804-812. Seibert, T.M. (1980). 'Juristische Topik: Ein Beispiel rur die argumentative Wechselbeziehung zwischen Situation und Fall, Regel und Ausnahme'. Zeitschri/t fur Literaturwissenscha/t und Linguistik, 10. W. Klein (ed.), Gottingen, pp. 169-177.
216 BIBLIOGRAPHY
Singer, M.G. (1961). Generalization in ehtics. New York: Russel & Russel. Snedaker, K. (1987). 'The content and structure of appellate argument: rhetorical analysis of brief writing strategies in the Sam Sheppard appeal'. In: Wenzel (ed.), pp. 315-324. Snoeck Henkemans, A.F. (1992). A nalysingcomplexargumentation. The reconstruction 0/ multiple and coordinatively compound argumentation in a critical discussion. Amsterdam: SicSat. Sobota, K. (1991). 'System and flexibility in law'. Argumentation, Vol. 5, No.3, pp. 275-282. Soeteman,A. (1989). Logic in law. Remarks on logic and rationality in normative reasoning, especialJy in law. Dordrecht etc.: Kluwer. Soeteman, A., E.A. Huppes-Cluysenaer, L.K. van Zaltbommel (1990). T aalbeheersing wor juristen. (Speech communication for lawyers) Groningen: Wolters-Noordboff. Stone, J. (1964). Legal system and lawyers' reasonings. London: Stevens. Struck, G. (1977). Zur Theorie juristischer Argumentation. Berlin: Duncker & Humblot. Stutman, R. (1987). 'Objection and recall of claims in legal discourse'. In: Wenzel (ed.), pp. 309-315. Summers, R.S. (1983). 'Comments on the "Foundation of legal reasoning'''. In: Krawietz and Alexy (eds.), pp. 145-158. Tammelo, I. (1969). Outlines 0/ modern legal logic. Wiesbaden: Steiner. Tammelo, I. (1978). Modem logic in the service 0/ law. Wien etc.: Springer. Tammelo, I., G. Moens, P. Brouwer (1981). 'De tegenformulemethode en haar rechtslogischetoepassingen' . Nederlands Tijdschriftwor RechtsfilosofieenRechtstheorie, Vol. 10, pp. 55-65. Toulmin, S.E. (1958). The useso/argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Toulmin, S., R. Rieke, A. Janik (1984). An introduction to reasoning. (second edition, first edition 1978) New York: Macmillan. Twigg, R. (1989). 'Narrative justice. An analysis of selected Supreme Coun decisions'. In: Gronbeck (ed.), pp. 86-93. Twining, W., D. Miers (1994). How to do things with rules. (third edition, first edition 1991) London etc.: Butterwonhs. Viehweg, Th. (1954). Topik undJurisprudenz. (fifth revised edition 1974) Munchen: Beck. Wagenaar, W.A., P.]. van Koppen, H.F.M. Crombag (1993). Anchored narratives. The psychology 0/ criminal evidence. London: Harvester Wheatsheaf. Wasserstrom, R.A. (1961). The judicial decision. Toward a theory 0/ legal justification. Stanford: Stanford University Press. Walker, G.B., S.E. Daniels (1995). 'Argument and alternative dispute resolution systems'. Argumentation, Vol. 9, no. 5, pp. 689-692. Was by, S.L., A. D'Amato, R. Metrailer (1976). 'The functions of oral argument in the U.S. Supreme Coun'. The Quarterly Journal o/Speech, Vol. 62, pp. 410-424. Weinberger, O. (1970). Rechtslogik. Versuch einer Anwendung modemer Logik au/ das juristiche Denken. Wien etc.: Springer. Weinberger, O. (1983). 'Logiscbe Analyse als Basis der juristiscben Argumentation'. In: Krawietz, Alexy (eds.), pp. pp. 159-232.
BIBLIOGRAPHY 217
Wenzel, J. (1987). Argument and critical practices. Proceedings of the fifth summer conference on argumentation. Annandale VA: Speech Communication Association. White, J.B. (1984). When words lose their meaning. Chicago: Unviersity of Chicago Press. White, J.B. (1989). 'What can a lawyer learn from literature?', Harvard Law Review, 102, 8, pp. 204-2047. White, J.B. (1990). Justice as translocation. An essay in cultural and legal criticism. Chicago: Chicago University Press. Wittgenstein, L. (1953). Philosophical investigations. Oxford. Wittgenstein, L. (1969). On certainty. Oxford. Wr6blewski, J. (1974). 'Legal syllogism and rationality of judicial decision'. Rechtstheorie, Band 14, Nr. 5, pp. 33-46. Wroblewski, J. (1979a) 'Verification and justification in the legal sciences'. In: Krawietz et al. (eds.), pp. 195-213. Wr6blewski, J. (1979b). Archiv fur Rechts- und Sozialphilosophie, Vol. 65, No.2, p. 281. Wr6blewski, J. (1992). The judicial application aflaw. (Edited by Z. Bankowski and N. MacCormick). Dordrecht etc.: Kluwer. Yoshino, H. (1978b). 'Uber die Notwendigkeit einer besonderen Normenlogik als Methode der juristischen Logik'. In: U. Klug, Th. Ramm, F. Rittner, B. Schmiedel (eds.), Gesetzgebungstheorie,furutische Logik, Zivil· und Prozessrecht. Gedacgtnisschrift fUr Jiirgen Rodig. Berlin etc.: Springer, pp. 140-161. Yoshino, H. (1981). 'Die logische Struktur der Argumentation bei der juristischen Entscheidung'. In: Aarnio, Niiniluoto, Uusitalo (eds.), pp. 235-255. Zarefsky, D., M.O. Sillars, J. Rhodes (eds.) (1983). Argument in transition. Proceedings of the third summer conference on argumentation. Annandale VA: Speech Communication Association. Ziegelmueller, G. and J. Rhodes (eds.) (1981). Dimensions of argument. Proceedings of the second summer conference on argumentation. Annandale VA: Speech Communication Association.
a contrario argument (see also argumentum a contrario) 9, 23-24, 187 analogical argument (see also analogical reasoning, argument from analogy, and argumentum a simi/,) 54 analogical reasoning (see also anlogical argument, argument from analogy and argumentum a simil,) 25, 112, 206 analytic overview 168, 169, 183, 184 antagonist 42, 164, 168, 172, 176, 208 - institutional antagonist 172 argument (see also argumentation) - apagogical argument (see also ar
gumentum ad absurdum, reductio ad absurdum) 54, 55
- argument from analogy (see also analogical argument, analogical reasoning, and argumentum a simil,) 8
- argument from coherence 73-89 - argument from consistency 73-89 - comparative argument 110 - consequentialist argument 82-84, 86,
deductive validity (see also formal validity, logical validity) dialectification 167 dialogical approach (of legal argumentation) i, 19,20,25, 197 difference of opinion 114, 128, 150, 164, 166, 170-175, 193 - linguistic difference of opinion 128 discourse (see also discussion) - general practical discourse 92-93, 99-
116 - practical discourse 92-116 discussion (see also discourse)
field-dependent 3, 17, 40, 43, 46, 53, 60, 189, 190 field-invariant 40, 43, 46 form of life (see also life world) 131-136, 137, 157, 161 formal validity (see also logical validity) 3, 15, 26, 28, 37, 38, 40, 48, 89, 183 functionalization 167
G
general legal principle (see also legal principle) 53, 87, 153 generalizability (see also universalizability) 15, 20, 100-101, 128, 129, 134, 196 grounds (in the Toulmin-model) 41-46 Grundnorm 144-145, 157, 160, 197, 215
H
hard case 7, 47, 141, 159, 177, 199 heuristic tool 39, 69, 164, 187, 178, 198, 201