Legal Communication & Rhetoric Journal, Vol. 8, 2011
30 Pages Posted: 30 Jun 2011
Date Written: June, 30 2011
This Article explores the theory and process of explanatory synthesis in comparison to rule synthesis and case-to-case analogical reasoning as a method of demonstrative legal reasoning and analysis and legal rhetoric. The Article takes the form of a Socratic dialogue to discuss the analytical and rhetorical advantages of explanatory synthesis. Explanatory synthesis provides an important option for inductive reasoning and argumentation within the deductive paradigm of legal analysis, and has rhetorical advantages over other forms of analogical reasoning when examined using the tools of modern argument theory and the rhetorical canons of law and economics.
Keywords: legal analysis, legal reasoning, rhetoric, legal rhetoric, modern argument theory, synthesis, explanatory synthesis, rule synthesis, paradigm
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation
Murray, Michael D., Rule Synthesis and Explanatory Synthesis: A Socratic Dialogue between IREAC and TREAT (June, 30 2011). Legal Communication & Rhetoric Journal, Vol. 8, 2011; Valparaiso University Legal Studies Research Paper No. 11-10. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1875903