Methods of Legal Reasoning

<P><STRONG>PART I. Controversy over legal methodology in the 19th and 20th centuries. <BR>1.</STRONG> Three stances. <STRONG>1.1.</STRONG> The rejection of method. <STRONG>1.2.</STRONG> Methodological heteronomy. <STRONG>1.3.</STRONG> Methodological autonomy. <STRONG>2</STRONG>. Methods of legal reasoning. <STRONG>3.</STRONG> Logic – analysis – argumentation – hermeneutics. <BR><STRONG>PART II. Logic. <BR>1.</STRONG> Introduction. <STRONG>2.</STRONG> Classical logic: propositional logic and first order predicate logic.<STRONG> 2.1</STRONG>. Presentation of calculi. <STRONG>2.2.</STRONG> Paradoxes of material implication. <STRONG>2.3.</STRONG> Examples. <STRONG>3.</STRONG> Deontic logic. <STRONG>3.1.</STRONG> Possible world semantics. <STRONG>3.2.</STRONG> Deontic logic. <STRONG>3.3.</STRONG> Paradoxes of deontic logic. <STRONG>3.4.</STRONG> Examples. <STRONG>4.</STRONG> Logic of action and logic of norms. <STRONG>4.1.</STRONG> Two types of obligation.<STRONG> 4.2.</STRONG> Logic of action. <STRONG>4.3.</STRONG> Jørgensen Dilemma. <STRONG>5.</STRONG> Defeasible logic. <STRONG>5.1.</STRONG> The concept of defeasibility. <STRONG>5.2.</STRONG> Defeasible logic.<STRONG> 5.3.</STRONG> Objections against nonmonotonic logic. <STRONG>5.4.</STRONG> Examples. <STRONG>5.5.</STRONG> Two remarks. <STRONG>6.</STRONG> Summary. <BR><STRONG>PART</STRONG> <STRONG>III. Analysis. <BR>1.</STRONG> Introduction. <STRONG>1.1.</STRONG> The notion of analysis. <STRONG>1.2.</STRONG> History of the concept. <STRONG>1.3.</STRONG> Analytic philosophy. <STRONG>2.</STRONG> Linguistic analysis. <STRONG>2.1.</STRONG> History and basic assumptions of linguistic analysis. <STRONG>2.2.</STRONG> Legal conceptual scheme. <STRONG>2.3.</STRONG> Speech acts theory. <STRONG>2.4.</STRONG> The method and its limits. <STRONG>3.</STRONG> Economic analysis of law. <STRONG>3.1.</STRONG> Law & Economics. <STRONG>3.2.</STRONG> Idea of economisation. <STRONG>3.3.</STRONG> Limits of the method. <STRONG>3.4.</STRONG> Conclusions. <STRONG>4.</STRONG> Summary. <BR><STRONG>PART IV. Argumentation. <BR>1.</STRONG> Introduction. <STRONG>1.1.</STRONG> Philosophies of argumentation. <STRONG>1.2.</STRONG> Criteria of a practical discourse. <STRONG>2.</STRONG> Two conceptions of a legal discourse. <STRONG>2.1.</STRONG> The topical-rhetorical conception of legal discourse. <STRONG>2.2. </STRONG>Procedural conception of legal discourse. <STRONG>3</STRONG>. Legal argumentation. <STRONG>3.1.</STRONG> Claim to universality. <STRONG>3.2.</STRONG> Structure of legal discourse. <STRONG>3.3.</STRONG> Applications.<BR><STRONG>PART V. Hermeneutics.<BR>1.</STRONG> Introduction. <STRONG>1.1.</STRONG> The beginnings of hermeneutics. <STRONG>1.2.</STRONG> What do we not know about hermeneutics? <STRONG>2.&nbsp;</STRONG>Hermeneutics as epistemology. <STRONG>2.1.</STRONG> Methodological current in philosophical hermeneutics. <STRONG>2.2.</STRONG> Legal receptions. <STRONG>3.</STRONG> Hermeneutics as ontology. <STRONG>3.1.</STRONG> Ontology of understanding. <STRONG>3.2.</STRONG> Legal receptions. <STRONG>4.</STRONG> The understanding of the law. <STRONG>4.1.</STRONG> Claim to universality. <STRONG>4.2.</STRONG> The nature of hermeneutic cognition. <STRONG>4.3.</STRONG> Applications. <BR><STRONG>PART</STRONG> <STRONG>VI. Methods of legal reasoning from a post-modern perspective. <BR>1.</STRONG> A summary. <STRONG>1.1.</STRONG> Arbitrariness. <STRONG>1.2.</STRONG> Metatheoretical perspective. <STRONG>1.3.</STRONG> Relationships between the methods: the three theses. <STRONG>2.</STRONG> Dilemmas of the contemporary philosophy of law. <STRONG>2.1.</STRONG> Contemporary positivism. <STRONG>2.2.</STRONG> Conclusions. <STRONG>3.</STRONG> The epistemological approach. <STRONG>3.1.</STRONG> The limits of legal cognition. <STRONG>3.2.</STRONG> Two discourses.<STRONG> 4.</STRONG> Unfinished projects. <STRONG>4.1.</STRONG> Classicism. <STRONG>4.2.</STRONG> Modernism. <STRONG>4.3.</STRONG> Postmodernism. </P>