Towards a Formal Account of Reasoning about Evidence: Argumentation Schemes and Generalisations

, , &
Artificial Intelligence and Law 11 (2-3):125-165 (2003)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

This paper studies the modelling of legal reasoning about evidence within general theories of defeasible reasoning and argumentation. In particular, Wigmore's method for charting evidence and its use by modern legal evidence scholars is studied in order to give a formal underpinning in terms of logics for defeasible argumentation. Two notions turn out to be crucial, viz. argumentation schemes and empirical generalisations.

Categories

Keywords

Reprint years

DOI

10.1023/b:arti.0000046007.11806.9a

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,386

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

My notes

Similar books and articles

Chris and Douglas Walton,'towards a formal account of reasoning about evidence: Argumentation schemes and generalizations'.Bex Floris & Henry Prakken - 2003 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 11:125-165.
Towards a formal account of reasoning about evidence: Argumentation schemes and generalisations. [REVIEW]Floris Bex, Henry Prakken, Chris Reed & Douglas Walton - 2003 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 11 (2-3):125-165.
Argumentation schemes.Douglas Walton, Chris Reed & Fabrizio Macagno - 2008 - New York: Cambridge University Press. Edited by Chris Reed & Fabrizio Macagno.
Solving a Murder Case by Asking Critical Questions: An Approach to Fact-Finding in Terms of Argumentation and Story Schemes. [REVIEW]Floris Bex & Bart Verheij - 2012 - Argumentation 26 (3):325-353.
Dialectical argumentation with argumentation schemes: An approach to legal logic. [REVIEW]Bart Verheij - 2003 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 11 (2-3):167-195.
Walton's Argumentation Schemes for Presumptive Reasoning: A Critique and Development. [REVIEW]J. Anthony Blair - 2001 - Argumentation 15 (4):365-379.
Defeasible reasoning and informal fallacies.Douglas Walton - 2011 - Synthese 179 (3):377 - 407.
A dialogical theory of presumption.Douglas Walton - 2008 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 16 (2):209-243.
Teleological Justification of Argumentation Schemes.Douglas Walton & Giovanni Sartor - 2013 - Argumentation 27 (2):111-142.
Argumentation schemes for presumptive reasoning.Douglas N. Walton - 1996 - Mahwah, N.J.: L. Erlbaum Associates.
Argument Schemes from the Point of View of Hamblin’s Dialectic.Jan A. van Laar - 2011 - Informal Logic 31 (4):344-366.
Did he jump or was he pushed?: Abductive practical reasoning.Katie Atkinson - 2009 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 17 (2):79-99.
Defeasible Classifications and Inferences from Definitions.Fabrizio Macagno & Douglas Walton - 2010 - Informal Logic 30 (1):34-61.
Advances in the Theory of Argumentation Schemes and Critical Questions.David Godden & Douglas Walton - 2007 - Informal Logic 27 (3):267-292.
Argumentation schemes and communities of argumentational practice.Andrew Aberdein - 2009 - In Juho Ritola (ed.), Argument Cultures: Proceedings of OSSA 2009. OSSA.

Analytics

Added to PP
2014-03-22

Downloads
13 (#1,010,467)

6 months
8 (#342,364)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Douglas Walton
Last affiliation: University of Windsor

Citations of this work

Argumentation schemes in AI and Law.Katie Atkinson & Trevor Bench-Capon - 2021 - Argument and Computation 12 (3):417-434.

View all 40 citations / Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references