CHAPTER 1 Introduction we evaluate evidences, and make judgements

to render legal decisions.

Logic and Law

LOGIC= is the study of the principles and LEGAL REASONING

methods of good reasoning.
Argument as an Expression of Reasoning
= it is the science of reasoning which aims
to determine and lay down the criteria of
good(correct) reasoning and bad(incorrect) ARGUMENT= is a claim put forward and
reasoning. defended with reason

=group of statements in which one

- It probes into the fundamental concepts
of argument, inference, truth, falsity
and validity among others.
- It is by means of logic that we clarify our
ideas, assess the acceptability of the
claims and beliefs we encounter and
justify our assertions and statements,
and make rational and sound decisions.
statement is claimed to be true on the
basis of another statement.
TWO ELEMENTS OF ARGUMENT
1. Conclusion- the statement that is being
claimed to be true
2. Premise- the statement that serves as
the basis or support of the conclusion

PSYCHOLOGY VS. LOGIC

PSYCHOLOGY LOGIC CATEGORIES OF ARGUMENT

- primarily concerned -studies the 1. Logical or Illogical
with how people principles of good 2. Valid of Invalid
reason reasoning 3. Sound or Unsound
- demands looking for -it does not merely
- Depends on the acceptability of the
patterns of behavior, describe how people
speech, or reason but to premise and connection between the
neurological activity discover and make premise and conclusion.
that take place in the available those - There are words or phrases that
process of reasoning. criteria that can be typically serve to indicate the premise
used to test or the conclusion of an argument.
arguments for - The presence of any of them often
correctness. though not always, signal that what
follows is the premise or the conclusion
LEGAL REASONING= is what we us when we Conclusion indicators= therefore, so, thus,
apply laws, rules, and regulations to particular hence.
facts and cases
Premise indicators= because, since, for,
=it is what we use when we interpret inasmuch as
constitutions and statues when we balance
fundamental principles and policies and when - Some of the arguments we will
encounter contain no indicators
 STATEMENT OF BELIEF/ OPINION= they are
statements about what a speaker or writer
Recognizing Arguments
happens to believe.
- An argument is a group of statements,
CONDITIONAL STATEMENT= contains an if-then
but not all groups of statements are
relationship
arguments
TWO COMPONENTS OF A CONDITIONAL
STATEMENT
EXPLANATION ARGUMENT
1. Antecedent (if clause)
= is an attempt to =is an attempt to
2. Consequent (then clause)
show why something show that
is the case something is the
case - Conditional statements are not
=they are not meant arguments because there is no claim
to prove or justify the that one statement is true because of
truth of a particular the other statement.
claim.
Components of Legal Reasoning

5 COMPONENTS
- Both arguments and explanations give
reasons but the nature of these reasons 1. Issue= any matter of controversy or
differ uncertainty
=point in dispute, in doubt, in question,
EXPLANATION ARGUMENT
or simply up for discussion or
=these reasons are =they are intended
usually the causes or to provide grounds consideration
factors that show how to justify a claim, to - Always formulated in an interrogative
or why a thing came show that it is sentence
to exist plausible or true. - Specifically pertains to a legal matter
2. Rule= it has 3 parts:
a. a set of elements (test)
- To distinguish arguments from b. a result that occurs when all the
explanations, we need to ask a key elements are present (and the
question: Is it the speaker’s intent to test is thus satisfied)
prove or establish that something is the c. a causal term that determines
case- that is to provide reasons or whether the result is
evidence for accepting a claim as true mandatory, prohibitory,
or is it his/her intent to explain why discretionary or declaratory.
something is the case- that is, to offer - Some riles have one o more exceptions,
an account of why some event has that if present would defeat the result,
occurred or why something is the way it even if all the elements are present.
is? - Existing rule governing the issue should
o If the former, then the passage be specifically cited
is and argument - Rule can also take the form of cases or
o If the latter, then the passage is principles that courts have already
an explanation decided
  The legal reasoning that
3. Fact= “material facts” are the facts that will prevail is that which
fit the elements of the rule is grounded on truth or
- The rule would be satisfied if the facts genuine facts
of the present case cover all elements b) Interference (deriving a legal
of the rule claim or judgement from the
- The facts to be considered must not be given laws and facts) which
one sided. pertains to the question of
- Every decision of a court of record shall logic.
clearly and distinctly state the facts and  The premises of the
the law on which it is based argument must not only
4. Analysis= this part is supposed to show be factual but the
the link between the rules and the facts connection of the
we presented to establish what we are premises to the
claiming in our argument conclusion must be
=the concern here is whether the logically coherent, that
material facts truly fit the law. is, the movement from
5. Conclusion=is the ultimate end of a the facts to the analysis,
legal argument and to the main claim
= it is what the facts, the rules and the must be valid.
analysis of the case amount to.  In accepting the truth
of a premise or
Evaluating Legal Reasoning
evidence, one must
TWO CRITERIA TO DETERMINE GOOD/BAD consider its coherence
REASONING to credible sources of
information as well as
1. TRUTH to the general set of
2. LOGIC facts already presented.
 One must also consider
- This can be explained by looking at the whether the facts
two main processes involved in legal presented are clear and
reasoning: unambiguous or need
a) Presentation of facts which more clarification
pertains to the question of  Admissibility of factual
truth evidence offered in the
 Deals with the question court is also a
“are the premises significant issue in legal
provided in the reasoning.
argument true or
acceptable?”
 Determining what are
the facts to be accepted
is a principal objective
when any case is tried
in court