What the legislature did not say

Journal of Argumentation in Context 5 (3):249-270 (2016)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The paper is about the uses of the argument from legislative counterfactual intention, in the field of legal interpretation and argumentation. After presenting the argument from intention in general, it distinguishes the varities of the argument from counterfactual legislative intention and discusses their justification conditions.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 92,261

External links

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

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Analogical Reasoning and Extensive Interpretation.Damiano Canale & Giovanni Tuzet - 2017 - Latest Issue of Archiv Fuer Rechts Und Sozialphilosphie 103 (1):117-135.
Entrenching bills of rights.Macklem Timothy - 2006 - Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 26 (1):107-129.
Legislative Intention Vindicated?Jeffrey Goldsworthy - 2013 - Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 33 (4):821-842.
Legislative Intent in Law's Empire.Richard Ekins - 2011 - Ratio Juris 24 (4):435-460.

Analytics

Added to PP
2017-12-19

Downloads
19 (#803,294)

6 months
9 (#317,143)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Damiano Canale
Università Commerciale Luigi Bocconi

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Counterfactuals.David Lewis - 1973 - Philosophy of Science 42 (3):341-344.
Making it Explicit.Isaac Levi & Robert B. Brandom - 1996 - Journal of Philosophy 93 (3):145.
The Morality of Law.Lon L. Fuller - 1964 - Ethics 76 (3):225-228.
Methods of Logic.P. L. Heath & Willard Van Orman Quine - 1955 - Philosophical Quarterly 5 (21):376.

View all 21 references / Add more references