more on this theme     |     more from this thinker

Single Idea 6574

[filed under theme 2. Reason / E. Argument / 3. Analogy ]

Full Idea

There is almost universal agreement that legal reasoning is fundamentally analogical, not deductive, in character.

Clarification

'Analogical' reasoning centres on comparison of examples

Gist of Idea

Legal reasoning is analogical, not deductive

Source

Robert Fogelin (Walking the Tightrope of Reason [2003], Ch.2)

Book Ref

Fogelin,Robert: 'Walking the Tightrope of Reason' [OUP 2004], p.63

A Reaction

This raises the question of whether analogy can be considered as 'reasoning' in itself. How do you compare the examples? Could you compare two examples if you lacked language, or rules, or a scale of values?

The 22 ideas from 'Walking the Tightrope of Reason'

6557 Humans may never be able to attain a world view which is both rich and consistent [Fogelin]
6555 We are also irrational, with a unique ability to believe in bizarre self-created fictions [Fogelin]
6565 The law of noncontradiction makes the distinction between asserting something and denying it [Fogelin]
6560 The law of noncontradiction is traditionally the most basic principle of rationality [Fogelin]
6574 Legal reasoning is analogical, not deductive [Fogelin]
6575 Philosophy may never find foundations, and may undermine our lives in the process [Fogelin]
6568 A game can be played, despite having inconsistent rules [Fogelin]
6572 Deterrence, prevention, rehabilitation and retribution can come into conflict in punishments [Fogelin]
6573 Retributivists say a crime can be 'paid for'; deterrentists still worry about potential victims [Fogelin]
6583 Radical perspectivism replaces Kant's necessary scheme with many different schemes [Fogelin]
6586 Cynics are committed to morality, but disappointed or disgusted by human failings [Fogelin]
6582 Conventions can only work if they are based on something non-conventional [Fogelin]
6576 My view is 'circumspect rationalism' - that only our intellect can comprehend the world [Fogelin]
6589 Knowledge is legitimate only if all relevant defeaters have been eliminated [Fogelin]
6596 For coherentists, circularity is acceptable if the circle is large, rich and coherent [Fogelin]
6597 A rule of justification might be: don't raise the level of scrutiny without a good reason [Fogelin]
6588 Scepticism is cartesian (sceptical scenarios), or Humean (future), or Pyrrhonian (suspend belief) [Fogelin]
6590 Scepticism deals in remote possibilities that are ineliminable and set the standard very high [Fogelin]
6585 Rationality is threatened by fear of inconsistency, illusions of absolutes or relativism, and doubt [Fogelin]
6607 The word 'beautiful', when deprived of context, is nearly contentless [Fogelin]
6605 Critics must be causally entangled with their subject matter [Fogelin]
6604 Saying 'It's all a matter to taste' ignores the properties of the object discussed [Fogelin]