Analogical Reasoning as Translation:: The Pragmatics of Transivity

This paper attempts to examine the underlying structure of analogical reasoning in decision making. The immediate (but not exclusive) context is the form of reasoning commonly seen as prevalent in common-law judicial decision making. Following Wittgenstein and Strawson the paper identifies the problem of the contingency of transitivity ofanalogical relations as a serious impediment to analogical reasoning. It then proceeds to offer a method of translation that delineates the borders of contingency and analyticity of transitivity in such cases, as well as proposeshow these borders may be manipulated. The theoretical insight is to treat analogical relations anaphorically, as ``propredicates'.Accordingly, the translation involves constructive functional transformation from the form of meaning as continuum to the form of meaning as n-chotomies. Greimasian semiotics are then critically applied to examine in what sense ``translation' – in this specific sense – can count as the ``deep structure' of analogical/transitive reasoning, and what sucha claim entails in terms of linguistic ideology. Although the model of translation is formal it is not acontextual, and must be supplemented by importation of constitutive practicalconsiderations (i.e. norms) from concrete decision-making contexts. As such this is a case study of the pragmatic functions offormalization – a conception that may seem alien to some. When determining which states-of-affairs are deemed compatible, the formal model is shown to serve as a framework to what eventually becomes a pragmatic device.     

On the Role of Normative Hierarchies in Constitutional Reasoning: A Survey of Some Paradigmatic Cases

This article examines the role of normative hierarchies in constitutional argumentation. A threefold distinction between formal, material, and axiological hierarchy is employed. The correlative concepts of formal validity, material validity, and applicability are also briefly described. Within this framework, four cases are analysed: Decisions 1146/1988 and 10/2010 of the Italian Constitutional Court, and Kadi I and Opinion 2/2013 of the Court of Justice of the European Union. As a result, it is argued that axiological hierarchies are frequently used to reshape certain fundamental legal arrangements, namely, the hierarchy of sources (Decision 1146/1988 and Kadi), competence clauses (Decision 10/2010), and interpretive methodologies (Opinion 2/13).     

Identifying Stalking: The Relevance of Intent in Commonsense Reasoning

One method of distinguishing stalking from law-abiding behavior is to determine whether the accused intended to cause fear or harm to the target. However, this distinction may not capture community concerns regarding intrusive or harassing behavior. The present research examines the effect of intent, persistence, relationship, and consequences on community perceptions of stalking. Responses of 1,080 members of the community to a series of scenarios indicated that the presence of explicit evidence of intent was not the only way stalking behavior was identified. Behavior was also identified as stalking as a greater degree of persistence was depicted. Females more often than males perceived the behavior as stalking and inferred intent to cause fear or harm. Most participants who identified the behavior as stalking also indicated that it should be illegal. These results may assist in guiding ongoing debates over appropriate stalking legislation and strategies to reduce the incidence of stalking, as well as indicating whether education regarding stalking laws is required.     

The Undesirability of Detailed Judicial Reasoning

In this paper we question the general practice in which Common Law based judicial systems produce detailed written decisions. The requirement to produce written court decisions is expensive and helps produce long delays. Furthermore, we show that the general applicability of detailed reasoning may be inefficient. Our method of proving this claim is to show that the individual litigants have almost nothing to gain from having a detailed written reasoning. In fact, most of the time, they are clearly better off by being able to switch to a policy that requires no written opinion. Our approach is most appropriate in circumstances of pecuniary private disputes where the parties involved act as rational utility, or profit, maximizers.     

司法推理中应用的基本法律概念(上)

从很早的时期及至当下,信托和其他衡平利益的基本性质,一直是人们乐于分析和争论的话题。所有学习衡平法的学生无不熟悉培根(Bacon)〔1〕和柯克(Coke)的经典讨论,甚至最新的信托法教科书也还在引用这位伟大的首席大法官的著名定义〔2〕(不管它实际上如何不足)。该主题对现代的法律思想家有着独特的魅力,兰德尔(Langdell)〔3〕和埃姆斯(Ames)〔4〕的著名论文,梅特兰(Maitland)在《衡平法讲演》中反复强调〔5〕的论点,奥斯丁(Austin)《法理学讲演》〔6〕中别出心裁的论述,萨蒙德(Salmond)在其法理学著作〔7〕中更为大胆的论断,哈特(Hart)…     

The Potential of Abductive Legal Reasoning

The article describes the potential of abductive legal reasoning as a means of systematically exploring the role of inferences within legal reasoning. Starting out from the structures of abduction as originally presented by Peirce in his four‐horsemen example, the author points to the fact that Peirce actually employed a hypothesis that targeted an institutional fact. Hence the abductive inference has a great potential for categorising new phenomena under norms, yet it is undertheorised within the field of law as compared to other fields of science. The article presents the idea of comparison in the frame of “double abduction” as an important feature of legal reasoning.     

论语用学视域中的法律推理

语用学是从微观、语言的层面分析和把握法律推理的新视角。在语用学规范性视域中,法律推理是一种融合话语行为、命题行为和语用行为的交互言语行为。其中,说者与听者都是法律推理主体;达成合理共识是法律推理的目的和原动力;遵守合作原则是法律推理语言有效性的保证。语境通过语言选择的装扮来影响法律推理,是影响话语权分配、共识达成及合作原则遵守与否的关键因素。改善语境是发展法律推理的必由之路。     

The Game of Probation

The structure, purpose, and procedure of probation, including the relationship between a probationer and a probation officer, are explained and discussed. The game theory model of decision-making and rational choice theory are discussed and applied to the relationship between a probationer and a probation officer as a basis for increasing the probationer’s likelihood of success. Applications and recommendations for both parties officers are discussed.     

Vladislav Surkov: A Pragmatic Idealism

The authors consider the past, present, and possible future position of ultraright parties in Ukraine in the comparative context of Eastern Europe and Europe as a whole.     

试论思想政治工作的说理艺术

思想政治工作要有特定的说理艺术,诸如情感说理、渐进说理、含蓄说理、刚柔说理、幽默说理、比喻说理,都是切实可行的说理艺术.     

司法会计鉴定论证若干方法的探讨

司法会计鉴定论证，是指司法会计鉴定人根据检验内容，结合鉴定要求，运用相关方法，引用相关标准，对送检材料进行分析、判断。比对鉴别法及平衡分析法是司法会计鉴定论证中比较重要的两种基本方法。司法会计鉴定引用的标准，是指对某些会计事项如何处置及其是否合法、正确所作的统一规定。     

条件推理能力的发展轨迹：“单向”还是“双向”？

条件推理能力的传统认知发展观认为认知发展的轨迹是单向的,并只存在于一个加工系统中,认知发展存在着几个不同质的阶段,按由低到高的顺序发展,在个体发展的早期,其认知特点主要是以直觉加工为主,而后逐渐转换为以分析式加工为主,但这些理论无法很好地解释为什么年龄和智力的增长并不必然导致推理中符合传统逻辑规范的回答率的提高.双重加工理论对此提出异议,认为条件推理能力的发展沿着两条轨迹进行,一条径直指向计算加工和对问题内容的去情境化推理能力的增长;第二条是启发式的、高度情境化加工的发展路线,对那种认为认知是从直觉加工到逻辑数学加工的单向发展的观点提出了挑战.     

视频游戏作品所包含的艺术类著作权

视频游戏是指通过计算机、电视等设备显示的交互式电子游戏。其发展已有30多年的历史,从早期的游戏机游戏、到电视游戏、计算机游戏,目前已发展到多媒体游戏、互动网络游戏的阶段。尽管视频游戏是由计算机程序实现的,但是,视频游戏作品是否就等于软件呢?在国外司法实践中,通常认为视频游戏作品除具有软件著作权外还具有艺术类著作权,并且自相关案例发展出了一系列观点。本文从分析国外案例出发,就视频游戏作品所包含的艺术类著作权进行初步的探讨。一、国外案例分析视频游戏于70年代出现在美国,而美国的《著作     

Dire and Sequestered Meetings: The Work of Game Wardens

Game wardens are law enforcement agents responsible for enforcing fish and wildlife laws. Based on data from extensive interviews with game wardens the authors describe dangerous situations faced by wardens in their work. Comparisons with the dangers experienced by other types of police officers are made. Temporal, spatial, and situational factors shape the uniqueness of the law enforcement experiences of the game warden. Specific factors found which increase dangerousness were: isolation of area, being outnumbered, being alone, mistakes like not wearing hunter’s orange, and not being aware an offender is under the influence. In addition, most if not all individuals encountered are armed and skilled in the use of deadly weapons.     

The Common Law and the Forms of Reasoning

The purpose of this article is to examine how various forms of reasoning both can and should be used to decide cases in the common law tradition. I start by separating positive questions about what the law is from normative questions about what the law ought to be. Next, I present a Peircean account of three main forms of reasoning – deduction, induction and abduction – and examine how they can be used by judges to decide cases in the common law. Finally, I argue that the three forms of reasoning can be used to answer both kinds of questions, but in different ways. All three forms of reasoning can be used to answer questions of positive law, while questions of normative law present a special case that may require the use of aesthetic judgments of taste in the formation of a legal hypothesis.     

推理过程中非理性现象的新解释

人们在实际的推理过程中常违反形式逻辑标准,出现各种偏差现象,表现出非理性,原有理论无法对此作出合理解释.双重加工理论能更好地解释人们实际推理和标准推理(normative reasoning)之间的不一致,认为人类存在着两个完全不同的认知系统:系统1--执行快速、平行、自动化和启发式加工;系统2--执行需要意志努力和认知资源的、控制和分析式加工.当系统1占优势时,人们会违反逻辑形式标准,出现偏差,表现出非理性;而当系统2占主导地位时,人们的推理会符合逻辑形式标准.     

Just Interpretation: The Status of Legal Reasoning in the Continental Legal Tradition

The following text discusses an issueof legal interpretation status in continentalsystem of law. Exploring a metaphor of theinterpretation as a translation, it emphasizesits creative aspect, which has been deniedoften in modern times. Reminding the Romanorigins of contemporary continental legalsystems, it uses historical arguments to accentthe intrinsically inventive character of legalinterpretation.     

The Cost of the Game: A Taxonomy of Social Interactions

This paper considers the role of reciprocity rules in various strategic settings. After distinguishing four typical categories of social interaction, the paper examines three forms of reciprocity constraints. An ideal rule of perfect incentive alignment (structural reciprocity) serves as a benchmark for the analysis of a golden rule of reciprocity, characterized by a mechanical linking of one player's strategy to that of the other player; and a silver rule of stochastic reciprocity, characterized by a probabilistic symmetry in the relationship between the players.