In our Epstein Critical Thinking text books, Chapter Twelve discusses how Reasoning by Analogy is used in the law. The section in the chapter explained that in law these type of arguments are the most used because lawyers can provide details, that are carefully analyzed arguments. Because laws are vague and not specific it is difficult for judges at all levels: Supreme Court, federal courts, state courts, county courts, and local courts.
The most common Reasoning by Analogy used in the law is reasoning by example. Because it is used based on a case for case basis. The excerpt from Edward H. Levi’s An Introduction to Legal Reasoning discusses how any case sets a precedent for other cases. By setting a precedent with any law the law becomes more specific based on the ruling of the judge.
Of course there are always cases that are later over ruled. The most important case in which this occured was Brown v. The Board of Education. The case allowed the “equal but separate” precedent for many cases until nearly a hundred years later when the case was considered wrong.
This is a great post because it is easy to relate to. The law is something that we are all familiar with, and we have each had experiences looking at the law from various view points. On most law based tv programs we hear lawyers arguing from a precedent set by a previous case. They then try to draw some connection between the cases so they can prove that what happened in that past case should hold true to the current one. However, you are right that each judge or jury can interpret the law in their own way, so it is constantly changing.
ReplyDeleteCatalina,
ReplyDeleteYou have brought a very interesting topic for one of the blogs so thank you for this. First of all, I really like how you talk about reasoning through analogy in the law because some times it is hard to understand what is going on in court, especially when it comes to understanding one side's reasons. By using analogies, it makes it easier to understand a point because sometimes lawyers and prosecutors are tricky when they use fancy language (that's what I call it haha!). Overall, you have written and blog which integrates the use of reasoning by analogy. Reasoning by analogy is a helpful tool for me especially when I cannot understand a certain concept.
Hey catalina,
ReplyDeleteI love your post ! I have taken a couple of law classes and they discussed about the various ways precedent is used. I never saw that ruling as an analogy until I read the chapter. Law can be really vague, and hence the judges get to use their subjective knowledge to perceive the law and decide on the case. Regardless, I think you did a fantastic job in clearly explaining the analogies in Law with that example. That example was a huge case. Glad the supreme court did not use previous rulings to decide on that case. Great explanation though. :)