Bibliography
Alchourrón, C. E. (1996). Detachment and defeasibility in deontic logic.
Studia Logica, 57:5–18.
Alchourrón, C. E. (1996). On law and logic. Ratio Juris, 9:331–48.
Alchourrón, C. E. and Bulygin, E. (1971). Normative Systems. Springer.
Alchourrón, C. E. and Makinson, D. (1981). Hierarchies of regulations
and their logic. In Hilpinen, R., editor, New Studies on Deontic Logic,
pages 123–48. Reidel.
Alchourrón, C. E., Gärdenfors, P., and Makinson, D. (1985). On the logic
of theory change: Partial meet contraction and revision functions.
Journal of Symbolic Logic, 50:510–30.
Alexy, R. (2002). A Theory of Constitutional Rights. Oxford University
Press.
Aquinas, T. Summa Theologiae. Ed. and trans. Fathers of the English
Dominican Province. Allen, Texas: Benzinger Bros, 1947.
Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics. Ed. and trans. W. D. Ross. Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 1954.
Baroni, P., Caminada, M., and Giacomin, M. (2011). An introduction to
argumentation semantics. The Knowledge Engineering Review, 26:365–410.
Bench-Capon, T. J. M. and Prakken, H. (2006). Justifying actions by
accruing arguments. In Dunne, P. E. and Bench-Capon, T. J. M., editors,
Computational Models of Argument. Proceedings of COMMA 2006, pages
247–258. IOS Press.
Bench-Capon, T. J. M. (2003). Persuasion in practical argument using
value-based argumentation frameworks. Journal of Logic and Computation,
13:429–448.
Bench-Capon, T. J. M. and Sartor, G. (2003). A model of legal reasoning
with cases incorporating theories and values. Artificial Intelligence,
150:97–142.
Blair, J. A. (2012). Groundwork in the Theory of Argumentation.
Springer.
Brewka, G. (1991). Nonmonotonic Reasoning: Logical Foundations of
Commonsense. Cambridge University Press.
Brewer, S. (1996). Exemplary reasoning: Semantics, pragmatics and the
rational force of legal argument by analogy. Harvard Law Review,
109:923–1028.
Brewer, S. (2011). Logocratic method and the analysis of arguments in
evidence. Law, Probability and Risk, 10:175–202.
Brozek, B. (2004). Defeasibility of Legal Reasoning. Zakamycze.
Brozek, B. (2008). Revisability vs. defeasibility. Northern Ireland
Legal Quarterly, 59:139–47.
Brozek, B. (2014). Law and defeasibility: a few comments on the logic of
legal requirements. Revus, 23:165–170.
Celano, B. (2012). True exceptions: Defeasibility and particularism. In
Ferrer Beltran, J. and Ratti, G. B., editors, The Logic of Legal
Requirements, pages 268–87. Oxford University Press.
Chisholm, R. M. (1957). Perceiving: A Philosophical Study. Cornell
University.
Cicero, De inventione (Rhetorici libri duo qui vocantur de inventione).
Stutgardiae : in aedibus Teubneri, 1965
Clark, K. L. (1978). Negation as failure. In Gallaire, H. and Minker,
J., editors, Logic and Data Bases, pages 293–332. Plenum.
Dancy, J. (2004). Ethics Without Principles. Oxford University Press.
Dascal, M. and Wróblewski, J. (1988). Understanding and interpretation
in pragmatics and in law. Law and Philosophy, pages 203–24.
Duarte, D. (2011). Linguistic objectivity in norm sentences:
Alternatives in literal meaning. Ratio Juris, 24:112–39.
Duarte d’Almeida, L. (2012). A proof-based account of legal exceptions.
Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, pages 1–36.
Dung, P. M. (1995). On the acceptability of arguments and its
fundamental role in nonmono- tonic reasoning, logic programming, and
n–person games. Artificial Intelligence, 77:321–57.
Fenton, N., Neil, M., and Berger, D. (2016). Bayes and the law. Annual
Review of Statistics and Its Application, 3:51–77.
Ferrer Beltran, J. and Ratti, G. B., editors (2012). The Logic of Legal
Requirements: Essays on Defeasibility. Oxford University Press.
Ferrer Beltran, J. and Ratti, G. B. (2012). Defeasibility and legality:
A survey. In Ferrer Beltran, J. and Ratti, G. B., editors, The Logic of
Legal Requirements: Essays on Defeasibility, pages 11–38. Oxford
University Press.
Gazzo Castañeda, L. E. and Knauff, M. (2016). Defeasible reasoning with
legal conditionals. Memory and Cognition, 44:499–517.
Gärdenfors, P. (1987). Knowledge in Flux. MIT.
Ginzberg, M. L., editor (1987). Readings in Nonmonotonic Reasoning.
Morgan Kaufmann.
Gordon, T. F. (1988). The importance of nonmonotonicity for legal
reasoning. In Fiedler, H., Haft, F., and Traunmüller, R., editors,
Expert Systems in Law: Impacts on Legal Theory and Computer Law, pages
111–26. Attempto.
Gordon, T. F. (1995). The Pleadings Game. An Artificial Intelligence
Model of Procedural Justice. Kluwer.
Gordon, T. F., Prakken, H., and Walton, D. N. (2007). The Carneades
model of argument and burden of proof. Artificial Intelligence,
171:875–96.
Governatori, G., Maher, M. J., Billington, D., and Antoniou, G. (2004).
Argumentation semantics for defeasible logics. Journal of Logic and
Computation, 14:675–702.
Governatori, G., Rotolo, A., and Sartor, G. (2005). Temporalised
normative positions in defeasible logic. In Proceedings of the Tenth
International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law (ICAIL
2005), pages 25–34. ACM.
Governatori, G. and Rotolo, A. (2010). Changing legal systems: legal
abrogations and annulments in defeasible logic. Logic Journal of IGPL,
18:157–94.
Guastini, R. (2012). Defeasibility, axiological gaps, and
interpretation. In Ferrer Beltran, J. and Ratti, G. B., editors, The
Logic of Legal Requirements, pages 182–92. Oxford University Press.
Hage, J. C. (1997). Reasoning with Rules: An Essay on Legal Reasoning
and Its Underlying Logic. Kluwer.
Hage, J. C. and Peczenik, A. (2000). Law, morals and defeasibility.
Ratio Juris, 13:305–25.
Hage, J. C. (2005). Studies in Legal Logics. Springer.
Hart, H. L. A. (1951). The ascription of responsibility and rights. In
Flew, A., editor, Logic and Language, pages 145–66.
Hitchcock, D. (2017). On Reasoning and Argument: Essays in Informal
Logic and on Critical Thinking. Springer.
Holland, J. (2012). Signals and Boundaries Building Blocks for Complex
Adaptive Systems. MIT.
Holland, J., Holyoak, K. J., Nisbett, R. E., and Thagard, P. R. (1989).
Induction. Processes of Inference, Learning and Discovery. MIT.
Holyoak, K. and Thagard, P. (1996). Mental Leaps: Analogy in Creative
Thought. MIT.
Horty, J. (2001). Nonmonotonic logic. In Goble, L., editor, The
Blackwell Guide to Philosophical Logic, pages 336–61. Blackwell.
Horty, J. F. (2007). Defaults with priorities. Journal of Philosophical
Logic, 36:367–413.
Horty, J. F. (2011). Rules and reasons in the theory of precedent. Legal
theory, 10:1–33.
Horty, J. F. (2012). Reasons as Defaults. Oxford University Press.
Hunter, A. (2013). A probabilistic approach to modelling uncertain
logical arguments. International Journal of Approximate Reasoning,
(54):47–81.
Idelberger, F., Governatori, G., Riveret, R., and Sartor, G. (2016).
Logic based smart contracts and blockchain systems. In Proceedings of
RuleML 2016, pages 167–183. Springer.
Koons, R. (2009). Defeasible reasoning. In Zalta, E. N., editor, The
Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Leibniz, G. W. De legum interpretatione, rationibus, applicatione,
systemate. In Sämtliche Schriften und Briefe. Edited by the Academy of
Sciences of Berlin. Series VI, Vol iv. Darmstadt/Leipzig/Berlin, 1923
Loui, R. P. and Norman, J. (1995). Rationales and argument moves.
Artificial Intelligence and Law, 3:159–89.
MacCormick, D. N. (1995). Defeasibility in law and logic. In Bankowski,
Z., White, I., and Hahn, U., editors, Informatics and the Foundations of
Legal Reasoning, pages 99–117. Kluwer Academic.
Maranhao, J. S. A. (2013). Defeasibility, contributory conditionals, and
refinement of legal systems. In Ferrer Beltran, J. and Ratti, G. B.,
editors, The Logic of Legal Requirements, pages 53–76. Oxford
University Press
McCarthy, J. (1980). Circumscription: A form of non-monotonic reasoning.
Artificial Intelligence, 13:27–39.
Modgil, S. and Prakken, H. (2010). Reasoning about preferences in
structured extended argumentation frameworks. In Baroni, P., Cerutti,
F., Giacomin, M., and Simari, G., editors, Computational Models of
Argument. Proceedings of COMMA 2010, pages 347–58. IOS.
Nute, D. (1994). Defeasible logic. In Handbook of logic in artificial
intelligence and logic programming. Volume 3: Nonmonotonic reasoning and
uncertain reasoning, pages 353–395. Oxford University Press.
Peczenik, A. (2005). Scientia Juris: Treatise of Legal Philosophy and
General Jurisprudence - Volume 4. Springer.
Perelman, C. and Olbrechts-Tyteca, L. (1969). The New Rhetoric: A
Treatise on Argumentation. University of Notre Dame Press
Pollock, J. L. (1995). Cognitive Carpentry: A Blueprint for How to Build
a Person. MIT.
Pollock, J. L. (1998). Perceiving and reasoning about a changing world.
Computational Intelligence, 14:498–562.
Pollock, J. L. (2010). Defeasible reasoning and degrees of
justification. Argument and Computation, pages 7–22.
Popper, K. R. (1959). The Logic of Scientific Discovery. Hutchinson.
Prakken, H. (1997). Logical Tools for Modelling Legal Argument: A Study
of Defeasible Reasoning in Law. Kluwer.
Prakken, H. (2005). A study of accrual of arguments, with applications
to evidential reasoning. In Proceedings of the Tenth International
Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law (ICAIL 2005), pages
85–94. ACM.
Prakken, H. (2010). An abstract framework for argumentation with
structured arguments. Argument and Computation, 1:93–124.
Prakken, H. and Sartor, G. (1996). Rules about rules: Assessing
conflicting arguments in legal reasoning. Artificial Intelligence and
Law, 4:331–68.
Prakken, H. and Sartor, G. (1998). Modelling reasoning with precedents
in a formal dialogue game. Artificial Intelligence and Law, 6:231–87.
Prakken, H. and Sartor, G. (2009). A logical analysis of burdens of
proof. In Kaptein, H., Prakken, H., and Verheij, B., editors, Legal
Evidence and Proof: Statistics, Stories, Logic, pages 223–53. Ashgate.
Prakken, H. and Sartor, G. (2015). Law and logic: A review from an
argumentation perspective. Artificial Intelligence, 227:214–45.
Prakken, H. and Vreeswijk, G. A. W. (2002). Logical systems for
defeasible argumentation. In Gabbay, D. and Günthner, F., editors,
Handbook of Philosophical Logic, pages 218–319. Kluwer.
Rahwan, I. and Simari, G. R. (2009). Argumentation in Artificial
Intelligence. Springer.
Raz, J. (1975). Practical Reason and Norms. Hutchinson.
Raz, J. (1985). Authority, law, and morality. The Monist, 68:295–323.
Rescher, N. (1977). Dialectics: A Controversy-oriented Approach to the
Theory of Knowl- edge. State University of New York Press.
Rescher, N. (2006). Presumption and the Practices of Tentative
Cognition. Cambridge University Press.
Reiter, R. (1980). Logic for default reasoning. Artificial Intelligence,
13:81–132.
Riveret, R., Prakken, H., Rotolo, A., and Sartor, G. (2008). Heuristics
in argumentation: A game-theoretical investigation. In Computational
Models of Argument. Proceedings of COMMA-08, pages 324–35. IOS.
Riveret, R., Rotolo, A., and Sartor, G. (2012). Probabilistic rule-based
argumentation for norm-governed learning agents. Artificial intelligence
and Law, 20:383–420.
Rodriguez, J. (2012). Against defeasibility of legal rules. In Ferrer
Beltran, J. and Ratti, G. B., editors, The Logic of Legal Requirements,
pages 89–107. Oxford University Press.
Ross, W. D. (1930). The Right and the Good. Clarendon.
Ross, W. D. (1939). Foundations of Ethics. Clarendon.
Russell, S. J. and Norvig, P. (2010). Artificial Intelligence. A Modern
Approach. Prentice Hall, 3rd edition
Sartor, G. (1994). A formal model of legal argumentation. Ratio Juris,
7:212–26.
Sartor, G. (2005). Legal Reasoning: A Cognitive Approach to the Law.
Springer.
Sartor, G. (2013). The logic of proportionality: Reasoning with
non-numerical magnitudes. German Law Journal, 14:1419–57.
Sergot, M. J., Sadri, F., Kowalski, R. A., Kriwaczek, F., Hammond, P.,
and Cory, H. (1986). The British Nationality Act as a logic program.
Communications of the ACM, 29:370–86.
Schauer, F. F. (2012). Is defeasibility an essential property of law? In
Ferrer Beltran, J. and Ratti, G. B., editors, The Logic of Legal
Requirements, pages 77–88. Oxford University Press.
Stone Sweet, A. (2004). The Judicial Construction of Europe. Oxford
University Press.
Toulmin, S. (1958). The Uses of Argument. Cambridge University Press.
Verheij, B., Bex, F., Timmer, S., Vlek, C., Meyer, J.-J., Renooij, S.,
and Prakken, H. (2016). Arguments, scenarios and probabilities:
connections between three normative frameworks for evidential reasoning.
Law, Probability and Risk, 15:35–70.
Viehweg, T. (1965). Topik und Jurisprudenz. Ein Beitrag zur
rechtswissenschaflichen Grundlagenforschung. Beck, 3 edition.
Walton, D. N. (2006). Fundamentals of Critical Argumentation. Cambridge
University Press.
Walton, D. N. (2013). Methods of Argumentation. Cambridge University
Press.
Walton, D. N., Reed, C., and Macagno, F. (2008). Argumentation Schemes.
Cambridge University Press.
Walton, D. and Sartor, G. (2013). Teleological justification of
argumentation schemes. Argumentation, pages 111–142
Walton, D., Sartor, G., and Macagno, F. (2016). An argumentation
framework for contested cases of statutory interpretation. Artificial
Intelligence and Law, 24:51–91.