Dudas razonables, sesgos cognitivos y emociones en la argumentación jurídica

Bajo Palabra. Revista de Filosofía 5:203-214 (2010)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Concepts as reasonable doubt, cognitive biases and emotions are now a theoretical problem for the practice of law, and the law understood as legal argumentation. From a theoretical point of view, the screenplay written by Reginald Rose, Twelve Angry Men, is an outstanding example to analyze some of these concepts, and its influence on procedural stage. Cognitive biases and informal fallacies are theoretical challenge to legal argumentation.

Categories

Keywords

Reprint years

Links

PhilArchive

External links

  • This entry has no external links. Add one.
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

My notes

Similar books and articles

Critical Notice of 'Fundamentos de la argumentación jurídica: revisión de las teorías sobre la justificación de las decisiones judiciales' by Evelin Feteris. [REVIEW]María G. Navarro - 2011 - Ideas Y Valores 60 (145):155-163.
Metáforas polémicas: El Caso de la argumentación (Polemic Metaphors: The Case of Argumentation).De Bustos Eduardo - 1996 - Theoria 11 (1):21-40.
Etapas/ Fases de la argumentación.María G. Navarro - 2011 - In Luis Vega and Paula Olmos Gómez (ed.), Compendio de Lógica, Argumentación y Retórica. Editorial Trotta. pp. 243--244.
Law, logic, rhetoric: A procedural model of legal argumentation.Arno R. Lodder - 2004 - In S. Rahman (ed.), Logic, Epistemology, and the Unity of Science. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers. pp. 569--588.
Legal Practices and the Reason of the Law.Kurt Nutting - 2002 - Argumentation 16 (1):111-133.
DiaLaw. On legal justification and dialogical models of argumentation.Arno R. Lodder - 1999 - Dordrecht, Boston and London: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Dialectical argumentation with argumentation schemes: An approach to legal logic. [REVIEW]Bart Verheij - 2003 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 11 (2-3):167-195.
A Pragma-Dialectical Approach of the Analysis and Evaluation of Pragmatic Argumentation in a Legal Context.Eveline T. Feteris - 2002 - Argumentation 16 (3):349-367.
Arguing About Goals: The Diminishing Scope of Legal Reasoning. [REVIEW]Pauline Westerman - 2010 - Argumentation 24 (2):211-226.
Religion as a control guide: On the impact of religion on cognition.Bernhard Hommel & Lorenza S. Colzato - 2010 - Zygon 45 (3):596-604.
Legal interpretative process and litigants' cognitive biases.Eric Langlais & Bruno Deffains - unknown

Analytics

Added to PP
2013-02-17

Downloads
868 (#17,323)

6 months
284 (#7,906)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references