Abstracts
Abstract
Gilbert's kisceral argumentation is, roughly speaking, about arguing based on intuitions. In the forefront of such a (rhetorical) model are arguers and audiences, who resolve disagreements using kisceral arguments. Intuitions as reasons were more important in pre-modern law, when the law was not as explicit, precise, and determinate as today. Law influenced by religion or religious law was a typical example. In our much more secular modern era, intuitions are more or less subordinated to the (legal) logical mode of arguing. However, in tough legal cases, when logic "runs out," it is values that decide them. Not surprisingly, neuroscience and cognitive psychology have shown a strong connection between values and intuition.
Keywords:
- kisceral argumentation,
- intuition,
- pre-modern law,
- hardest cases,
- values
Résumé
L'argumentation kiscérale de Gilbert consiste, en gros, à argumenter sur la base d'intuitions. Au premier plan d'un tel modèle (rhétorique) se trouvent ceux qui argumentent et leurs auditoires, qui résolvent les désaccords à l'aide d'arguments kiscéraux. Les intuitions en tant que raisons étaient plus importantes dans le droit prémoderne, lorsque le droit n'était pas aussi explicite, précis et définitif qu'aujourd'hui. Le droit influencé par la religion ou la loi religieuse en était un exemple typique. Dans notre époque moderne beaucoup plus laïque, les intuitions sont plus ou moins subordonnées au mode logique (juridique) de l’argumentation. Cependant, dans les cas juridiques difficiles, lorsque la logique « s'épuise », ce sont les valeurs qui les règlent. Sans surprise, les neurosciences et la psychologie cognitive ont montré un lien étroit entre les valeurs et l'intuition.
Download the article in PDF to read it.
Download
Appendices
Bibliography
- Ahmed, R. 2018. The Oxford handbook of Islamic law. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- Alexy, R. 1989. A theory of legal argumentation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- Aristotle. 2004. Rhetoric. Mineola, New York: Dover Publications, Inc.
- Baldwin, J. E. 2012. Prostitution, Islamic law and Ottoman societies. Journal of Economic and Social History of the Orient 55: 117-152.
- Bassiouni, M. 1992. The Islamic criminal justice system. London, New York: Oceana Publications.
- Cahill-O’Challaghan, R. 2020. Values in the Supreme Court. Oxford: Hart Publishing.
- Cammack, M. 2012. Islamic law and crime in contemporary courts. Berkeley J. of Middle Eastern & Islamic Law 4(1): 1-7.
- Dworkin, R. 1997. Freedom’s law: The moral reading of the American Constitution. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
- Dworkin, R. 1997. Taking rights seriously. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
- Eemeren van, F. H. 2010. Strategic maneuvering in argumentative discourse. Amsterdam: John Banjamins Publishing Company.
- El-Awa, M. S. 1993. Punishment in Islamic law. American Trust Publications: 1-68.
- Gilbert, M. A. 1994. Multi-modal argumentation. Philosophy of the Social Sciences 24(2): 159-177.
- Gilbert, M. A. 1997. Coalescent argumentation. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
- Gilbert, M. A. 2011. The kisceral: Reason and intuition in argumentation. Argumentation 25: 163-170.
- Griswold, C. H. 2020. Plato on rhetoric and poetry. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. URL: <https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/plato-rhetoric/>.
- Guastini, R. 2014. La sintassi del diritto. Torino: G. Giappichelli editore.
- Hallaq, W. B. 2009. An introduction to Islamic law. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- Hart, H. L. A. 1994. The concept of law. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
- Juynboll, T. W. 1961. Adhab, in Short encyclopaedia of Islam, eds. H. A. R. Gibb and J. H. Kramers. Leiden: E. J. Brill.
- Jung, C. G. 1971. Psychological types. London: Routledge.
- Kahneman, D. 2011. Thinking, fast and slow. London: Penguin Books.
- Kelly, J. M. 1992. A short history of Western legal theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- Kelsen, H. 1989. Pure theory of law. Gloucester, Mass.: Peter Smith.
- MacCormick, N. 1994. Legal reasoning and legal theory. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
- Mercier, H. and D. Sperber. 2017. The enigma of reason. London: Penguin Books.
- Novak, M. 2016. A type theory of law: An essay in psychoanalytic jurisprudence. Dordrecht: Springer.
- Perelman, C. and Lucie Olberchts-Tyteca. 2008. The new rhetoric. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press.
- Plato. 1993. Symposium and phaedrus. New York: Dover Publications, Inc.
- Posner, R. 2010. How judges think. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
- Radbruch, G. 2003. Rechtsphilosophie. Heidelberg: C. F. Müller.
- Rheinstein, M. 1967. Introduction, to Max Weber, on law in economy and society. New York: Simon and Schuster.
- Robinson, O. F., Fergus, T. D. and W. M. Gordon. 2000. European legal history. London: Butterworths.
- Rosen, L. 1980-81. Equity and discretion in a modern Islamic legal system. Law & Society Review 15(2), 217-246.
- Rot, M. T. 1997. Law collections from Mesopotamia and Asia Minor. Atlanta: Scholars Press.
- Schacht, J. 1964. An introduction to Islamic law. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
- Schwartz, Shalom H. Jan Cieciuch, Michele Vecchione, Eldad Davidov, Ronald Fischer, Constanze Beierlein, Alice Ramos, Markku Verkasalo, Jan-Erik Lönnqvist, Kursad Demirutku, Ozlem Dirilen-Gumus, Mark Konty. 2012. Refining the theory of basic individual values. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 103(4) 663-688.
- Tindale, C. W. 2004. Rhetorical argumentation. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications.
- Tindale, C. W. 2021. The anthropology of argument. London: Routledge.
- Weber, M. 1978. Economy and society. Berkeley: University of California Press.
- Turner, B. S. 1974. Weber and Islam: A critical study. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
- Zarefsky, D. 2014. Rhetorical perspectives on argumentation: Selected essays by David Zarefsky. Dordrecht: Springer.
- Zweigert, K., Kötz, H. 1998. An introduction to comparative law. Oxford: Oxford University Press.