The Irrelevance of Contemporary Academic Philosophy for Law: Recovering the Rhetorical Tradition

ON PHILOSOPHY IN AMERICAN LAW, Francis J. Mootz III, ed., Cambridge U. Press, 2009

UNLV William S. Boyd School of Law Legal Studies Research Paper No. 08-27

10 Pages Posted: 25 Mar 2008 Last revised: 22 Jul 2008

See all articles by Francis Joseph Mootz

Francis Joseph Mootz

University of the Pacific - McGeorge School of Law

Date Written: March 25, 2008

Abstract

This short paper will appear in a volume of original essays, On Philosophy in American Law (Francis J. Mootz III ed., Cambridge Univ. Press forthcoming 2009). I argue that the undeniable rift between philosophy and law is more than a simple dichotomy of theory and practice. Instead, the sharp distinction between philosophy and law occurred when both disciplines built insular guilds that employed distinctive vocabularies to distinguish themselves from rhetoric, and it is by returning to their roots in rhetoric that philosophy and law might find their common ground in the elucidation of rhetorical knowledge.

Keywords: Philosophy, Law, Gadamer, Perelman, rhetorical knowledge, rhetoric, Plato, sophists

Suggested Citation

Mootz, Francis Joseph, The Irrelevance of Contemporary Academic Philosophy for Law: Recovering the Rhetorical Tradition (March 25, 2008). ON PHILOSOPHY IN AMERICAN LAW, Francis J. Mootz III, ed., Cambridge U. Press, 2009; UNLV William S. Boyd School of Law Legal Studies Research Paper No. 08-27. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1112507 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1112507

Francis Joseph Mootz (Contact Author)

University of the Pacific - McGeorge School of Law ( email )

3200 Fifth Avenue
Sacramento, CA 95817
United States

Here is the Coronavirus
related research on SSRN

Paper statistics

Downloads
333
Abstract Views
1,707
rank
96,706
PlumX Metrics