Abstract

http://ssrn.com/abstract=1469726
 


 



Law Logic


Jeffrie G. Murphy


Arizona State University College of Law

1967

Ethics, Vol. 77, p. 193, 1967

Abstract:     
Many commentators have noted that legal reasoning is neither completely inductive nor deductive, and have preferred to classify it as law logic. This article argues that this distinction is misguided. While it is correct to say that the connection between reasons and decisions in the law rests upon the presence of certain conventional rules uniting them, this article argues, however, the presence of these rules does not even justify our calling legal decisions rational in any but a very weak sense. Legal argument employs no special logic and manifests no special pattern of rationality. It begins by considering the relation between evidence and verdicts in criminal law. Then it passes on to the more difficult problems raised primarily in civil law, where the reasoning from case by case by analogy, the most strikingly unique form, exists.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 9

Keywords: Inductive and Deductive Logic, Law Logic, Legal Reasoning

Accepted Paper Series


Download This Paper

Date posted: September 9, 2009  

Suggested Citation

Murphy, Jeffrie G., Law Logic (1967). Ethics, Vol. 77, p. 193, 1967. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1469726

Contact Information

Jeffrie G. Murphy (Contact Author)
Arizona State University College of Law ( email )
Box 877906
Tempe, AZ 85287-7906
United States
(480) 965-5856 (Phone)
(480) 965-2427 (Fax)
Feedback to SSRN


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 309
Downloads: 59
Download Rank: 212,670

© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo8 in 0.266 seconds