Legal Argumentation : Reasoned Dissensus and Common Ground

In legal argumentation, "dissensus" is the point of departure, "consensus "the endpoint. However, the relationship between "dissensus" and "consensus" in argumentation is more complex than it looks at first sight. First, a fruitful debate presupposes not only a difference of opinion, but also commonalities of meaning and corresponding rationality criteria, that is, "consensus "or common ground. Second, legal argumentation does not always result in "consensus". It also explicates and refines differences of opinion about the means of proof, methods of interpretation, or the values that should prevail. It follows that in legal discourse, "dissensus" and "consensus" are not only opposites, but also interconnected in a complex way."Legal Argumentation: Reasoned Dissensus and Common Ground "includes contributions from law, argumentation theory, logic and philosophical perspectives, discussing the intriguing interconnection between "dissensus "and "consensus" in legal argumentation. The insights may be of interest n

ot only to experts in Legal Methodology, Argumentation Theory and Legal Evidence, but to judges, lawyers and law students as well. [Publisher's text].

Special access authorizations may apply; please contact us for further information.