Skip to main content

1995 | Buch

The Pleadings Game

An Artificial Intelligence Model of Procedural Justice

verfasst von: Thomas F. Gordon

Verlag: Springer Netherlands

insite
SUCHEN

Über dieses Buch

The British philosopher Stephan Toulmin, in his The Uses of Argument, made the provocative claim that "logic is generalized jurisprudence". For Toulmin, logic is the study of nonns for practical argumentation and decision making. In his view, mathematical logicians were preoccupied with fonnalizing the concepts of logical necessity, consequence and contradiction, at the expense of other equally important issues, such as how to allocate the burden of proof and make rational decisions given limited resources. He also considered it a mistake to look primarily to psychology, linguistics or the cognitive sciences for answers to these fundamentally nonnative questions. Toulmin's concerns about logic, writing in the 1950's, are equally applicable to the field of Artificial Intelligence today. The mainstream of Artificial Intelligence has focused on the analytical and empirical aspects of intelligence, without giving adequate attention to the nonnative, regulative functions of knowledge representation, problem solving and decision-making. Nonnative issues should now be of even greater interest, with the shift in perspective of AI from individual to collective intelligence, in areas such as multi-agent systems, cooperative design, distributed artificial intelligence, and computer-supported cooperative work. Networked "virtual societies" of humans and software agents would also require "virtual legal systems" to fairly balance interests, resolve conflicts, and promote security.

Inhaltsverzeichnis

Frontmatter
Chapter 1. Introduction
Abstract
In modern democratic states, political power is divided among the executive, legislative and judicial branches of government. When resolving concrete legal disputes, there is also a division of power between the parties and the courts. What are the limits of judicial discretion? How should it be decided whether these limits have been respected? Are there methods for constructing decisions which are sure to fall within these limits?
Thomas F. Gordon
Chapter 2. The Legal Domain: Article Nine
Abstract
The main source of examples for the theory of argumentation developed in this book will be Article Nine of the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) of the United States, covering “Secured Transactions”. Although quite complex in its entirety, Article Nine is relatively self-contained, so that I hope to be able to explain the code in sufficient depth for our purposes here within a few pages. The goal is to provide just enough information about Article Nine to allow non-lawyers to understand and appreciate the legal arguments we will be using as examples.1
Thomas F. Gordon
Chapter 3. Philosophy of Legal Reasoning
Abstract
Practical legal reasoning and argumentation, as is all behavior, are subject to resource limitations. Decisions and judgments are usually made under time pressure, for example. Of particular interest here, however, are limitations on information and knowledge about the law, about the facts of a case, and more generally on our ability to experience, understand and reason rationally about the world. The theory and computational model of legal reasoning to be developed in this book attempts to take some of these pragmatic limitations on rationality into consideration. This chapter and the next discuss certain theories and models of legal philosophy and Artificial Intelligence, respectively, to see what they can contribute to our understanding of legal reasoning in the face of such limitations. After a critical examination of this previous work, my own theory of legal argumentation will then try to take into account the lessons learned.
Thomas F. Gordon
Chapter 4. Formal Models of Argumentation
Abstract
As this is an artificial intelligence book, our goal is a computational model of some legal process. The discourse norms from Alexy’s theory of legal argumentation are quite abstractly stated, and it is still less than clear how or whether they can be modeled in a computer program. One result of the previous chapter on legal philosophy is a set of dimensions for classifying discourse games. In this chapter, several existing formal models of argumentation will be described and then classified along these dimensions. The goal is not so much to assess their suitability for modeling legal argumentation as to gather ideas and techniques which can be adapted in a discourse game designed expressly for this purpose.
Thomas F. Gordon
Chapter 5. The Pleadings Game
Abstract
There are many kinds of legal proceedings, each with its own set of norms. Alexy’s thesis is that the norms of legal argumentation are a specialization of the moral norms of general, practical discourse. This is agreeable if “specialization” is understood to mean that these general norms are defeasible rules which may be overridden by the particular norms for some type of legal proceeding. Similarly, the rules for legal discourse Alexy proposes may also have to be refined and adapted to further the particular goals of some type of proceeding.
Thomas F. Gordon
Chapter 6. An Implementation in Standard ML
Abstract
This chapter explains one way to implement the Pleadings Game. The intent is to provide just enough detail to allow any AI programmer to reimplement the game, in the programming language of his or her choice.
Thomas F. Gordon
Chapter 7. Conclusion
Abstract
The Pleadings Game is a theoretical model of Alexy’s discourse theory of legal argumentation. The norms of civil pleading are modeled by the preconditions and effects of rules for making certain kinds of claims and arguments during pleading. Legal arguments are not found or constructed by the model. It is not a model of the legal reasoning behavior of lawyers.1 Analytical, empirical and normative claims have been made for the Pleadings Game model. Keeping its purpose and object in mind, let us now try to evaluate to what extent these claims are supported by the game.
Thomas F. Gordon
Backmatter
Metadaten
Titel
The Pleadings Game
verfasst von
Thomas F. Gordon
Copyright-Jahr
1995
Verlag
Springer Netherlands
Electronic ISBN
978-94-015-8447-0
Print ISBN
978-90-481-4591-1
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-015-8447-0