Deck 11: European Legal Method

Question 1

Match each form of reasoning with its definition.
-Inductive reasoning.

A) This type of reasoning starts from a specific situation and, through a series of inferences from that specific situation, reaches a conclusion that is generally applicable. This form of reasoning provides less certain results than the other form because there is a greater margin of error in drawing inferences from one specific example to come to conclusions that are applicable to a range of situations.
B) This type of reasoning starts from a general situation and, through a series of inferences, reaches a conclusion on a specific point. As long as the major and minor premises are correctly constructed, then the conclusion has to be true. This is a more certain form of reasoning.

Answer 1

A

Question 2

Match each form of reasoning with its definition.
-Deductive reasoning.

A) This type of reasoning starts from a specific situation and, through a series of inferences from that specific situation, reaches a conclusion that is generally applicable. This form of reasoning provides less certain results than the other form because there is a greater margin of error in drawing inferences from one specific example to come to conclusions that are applicable to a range of situations.
B) This type of reasoning starts from a general situation and, through a series of inferences, reaches a conclusion on a specific point. As long as the major and minor premises are correctly constructed, then the conclusion has to be true. This is a more certain form of reasoning.

Answer 2

B

Question 3

Statements using deductive reasoning employ a specific logical form called the ______.

Answer 3

syllogism

Question 4

Deductive reasoning is used when a judge identifies that there is a relevant factual similarity between an earlier case, or cases, and the present one.

Question 5

Inductive reasoning is used when a judge identifies the rule of law on which the previous case rested (the ratio of the previous case).

Question 6

Inductive reasoning is used when a judge applies the legal rule to the case before him/her.

Question 7

According to Golding, analogy involves reasoning by inference from the specific to the _______.

Question 8

What is the correct order of the elements of a syllogism?

A) Minor premise, major premise, conclusion.
B) Major premise, minor premise, the conclusion.
C) First minor premise, second minor premise, conclusion.
D) Conclusion, major premise, minor premise.

Question 9

Match each constituent element of a syllogism to its legal signifier in a legal syllogism.
-Major premise.

A) Legal rule of general application.
B) Particular facts of the case.
C) A legal outcome.

Question 10

Match each constituent element of a syllogism to its legal signifier in a legal syllogism.
-Minor premise.

A) Legal rule of general application.
B) Particular facts of the case.
C) A legal outcome.

Question 11

Match each constituent element of a syllogism to its legal signifier in a legal syllogism.
-The conclusions.

A) Legal rule of general application.
B) Particular facts of the case.
C) A legal outcome.

Question 12

Consider this syllogism and decide whether the conclusion is logically true or false.
All dogs have paws…
Most pets have paws…
Therefore most pets are dogs.

Question 13

A trial lawyer needs first to create a factual theory of the case before moving on to consider an empirical analysis of it. What type of reasoning does the trial lawyer use at the fact analysis stage?

A) Inductive.
B) Deductive.
C) Abductive.
D) Constructive.

Question 14

Briefly explain how it may be possible for two judges faced with similar factual situations and similar case law to reach different decision in law.

Question 15

Logic may only enable a judge to identify a range of rational options. The choice of a 'right answer' will also be shaped by the social or economic values that the legal system serves. This is often expressly recognised by judicial discussions of________ (two words).

Question 16

Explain briefly what may be the positive and negative effects of limiting the role of logic in legal reasoning.

Question 17

Many lawyers would say that they make as much use of the art of rhetoric as they do of logical reasoning in order to construct a case for their client - but what is the difference between logic and rhetoric?
b. Rhetoric. = The art of constructing an argument; rhetorical argument may be coherent and persuasive, but is not necessarily the objective truth.

Question 18

The uncertainties associated with legal fact-finding have led some legal theorists to become ________ (two words).