Judicial Reasoning: The Production of Legal Knowledge

Mustafa Tashkandi
{"title":"Judicial Reasoning: The Production of Legal Knowledge","authors":"Mustafa Tashkandi","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3386200","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The author of this paper argues that judicial ratios can be classified into two different categories: 1) logical ratios, and 2) non-logical ratios. As an example, the author presents four different judicial ratios from four different UK case law. The paper also discusses the criteria which one must be looking at when classifying judicial ratios. The paper borrows ideas from the field of Set Theory and Analytic Philosophy, especially from the work of Bertrand Russell and Ludwig Wittgenstein.","PeriodicalId":433815,"journal":{"name":"English Law: Personal Obligations & Legal Theory (Topic)","volume":"168 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-05-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"English Law: Personal Obligations & Legal Theory (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3386200","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The author of this paper argues that judicial ratios can be classified into two different categories: 1) logical ratios, and 2) non-logical ratios. As an example, the author presents four different judicial ratios from four different UK case law. The paper also discusses the criteria which one must be looking at when classifying judicial ratios. The paper borrows ideas from the field of Set Theory and Analytic Philosophy, especially from the work of Bertrand Russell and Ludwig Wittgenstein.
司法推理:法律知识的产生
本文认为,司法比率可以分为两类:1)逻辑比率和2)非逻辑比率。作为一个例子,作者提出了四种不同的司法比例从四个不同的英国判例法。本文还讨论了对司法比率进行分类时必须考虑的标准。本文借鉴了集合论和分析哲学领域的思想,特别是罗素和维特根斯坦的著作。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信