Log In
Or create an account ->
Imperial Library
Home
About
News
Upload
Forum
Help
Login/SignUp
Index
Preface
Acknowledgments
Chapter One: Ancient Rules of Logic and a New Perspective on Argument
1.1 A New Way of Thinking about Jazz—and Legal Argument
1.2 Persuasive Music, Logical Order, and Compelling Legal Argument
1.3 A Focus on One Logical Tool: Formal Logic
1.4 Formal Logic’s Pervasive, Practical Advantage in Litigation
1.5 An Overview of this Book, Its Approach, Method, and Chapters
1.6 Chapter One in Review
Chapter Two: Logic and the Tools of Disciplined, Creative Legal Argument
2.1 Logic and the Craft of Making Legal Argument
2.2 Logic as a Tool of the Craft of Legal Argument
2.2.1 Deductive Logic
2.2.2 Inductive Logic
2.2.3 Analogy
2.3 Logical Fallacies as Tools of the Craft of Legal Argument
2.4 Chapter Two in Review
Chapter Three: Formal Logic and its Role in Litigation
3.1 A Practical View of Formal Logic’s Role in Litigation
3.2 The Pervasive Role of Formal Logic in Legal Argument
3.3 The “Formal” in Formal Logic, and How it Helps Support and Attack Legal Argument
3.4 Learning the Tools of Formal Logic
3.5 Using the Language of Formal Logic to Reveal a Legal Argument’s Logical Form
3.6 Chapter Three in Review
Chapter Four: The Rules of Formal Logic and the Logical Fallacy
4.1 Rules, Laws, and Legal Argument
4.2 Rules of Formal Logic
4.2.1 A Rule that Applies to Hypothetical Syllogisms
4.2.2 Rules that Apply to Categorical Syllogisms
4.2.3 A Rule that Applies to Disjunctive Syllogisms
4.3 Chapter Four in Review
Chapter Five: The Fallacy of Denying the Antecedent
5.1 Hypothetical Syllogisms, Order, and Inference
5.2 Identifying Hypothetical Arguments
5.3 Finding Antecedent Terms and Consequent Terms, Denied Terms and Affirmed Terms
5.4 Why Denying the Antecedent Term is Unpersuasive Argument
5.5 How Courts Have Used the Fallacy of Denying the Antecedent
5.6 Keys to Using the Fallacy of Denying the Antecedent to Evaluate and Improve Legal Argument
5.7 Chapter Five in Review
5.8 Exercise
Chapter Six: The Fallacy of Affirming the Consequent
6.1 More on Hypothetical Syllogisms, Order, and Inference
6.2 Why Affirming the Consequent Term is Unpersuasive Argument
6.3 How Courts Have Used the Fallacy of Affirming the Consequent
6.4 Keys to Using the Fallacy of Affirming the Consequent to Evaluate and Improve Legal Argument
6.5 Chapter Six in Review
6.6 Exercise
Chapter Seven: The Fallacy of the Undistributed Middle Term
7.1 Middle Terms, Distribution, and Bad Argument
7.2 Finding the Middle Term
7.3 Spotting Distribution, or Lack Thereof, in the Middle Term
7.4 Why an Undistributed Middle Term Makes an Argument Unpersuasive
7.5 How Courts Have Used the Fallacy of the Undistributed Middle to Evaluate Legal Argument
7.6 Keys to Using the Fallacy of the Undistributed Middle to Evaluate and Improve Legal Argument
7.7 Chapter Seven in Review
7.8 Exercise
Chapter Eight: The Fallacy of the Illicit Process
8.1 Two Kinds of Illicit Processes and Bad Argument
8.2 Finding the Major or Minor Terms
8.3 Spotting Distribution, or Lack Thereof, in the Major or Minor Terms
8.4 Why an Illicit Process Makes an Argument Unpersuasive
8.5 How Courts Have Used the Fallacy of the Illicit Process to Evaluate Legal Argument
8.6 Keys to Using the Fallacy of the Illicit Process to Evaluate and Improve Legal Argument
8.7 Chapter Eight in Review
8.8 Exercise
Chapter Nine: The Fallacy of the Negative Premise
9.1 Negative Premises and Positive Conclusions
9.2 The Force of an Affirmative Conclusion
9.3 Finding Positive Conclusions and Supporting Them with Positive Premises
9.4 How Courts Have Used the Fallacy of the Negative Premise to Evaluate Legal Argument
9.5 Keys to Using the Fallacy of the Negative Premise to Evaluate and Improve Legal Argument
9.6 Chapter Nine in Review
9.7 Exercise
Chapter Ten: The Fallacy of Affirming a Disjunct
10.1 Disjunctive Syllogisms and the Problem with “Or”
10.2 Identifying Disjunctive Arguments and Disjuncts
10.3 Why Affirming a Disjunct Might Be Unpersuasive Argument
10.4 How Lawyers and Judges Can Use the Fallacy of Affirming a Disjunct
10.5 Keys to Using the Fallacy of Affirming a Disjunct
10.6 Chapter Ten in Review
10.7 Exercise
Chapter Eleven: A Fallacy-Based Perspective on Legal Argumentation for Litigators and Judges
11.1 Three Kinds of Legal Arguments and a Fallacy-Based Perspective on Evaluating Legal Argument
11.2 The Rules of Deductive Logic and Patterns of Fallacious Argument Revisited
11.3 The Hallmarks of Six Formal Fallacies in Legal Argument
11.4 Different Tools, Different Skills, and Different Perspectives for Thinking about Legal Argument
11.4.1 A Multifaceted Approach to Legal Argument
11.4.2 Self-Assessment
11.4.3 Responding to Fallacious Arguments
11.4.4 Thinking, Speaking, Reading, and Listening Syllogistically
11.5 Limits of a Fallacy-Based Perspective on Legal Argument
11.6 Chapter Eleven in Review
Chapter Twelve: Logic’s Value to Lawyers who Solve Legal Problems with Argument
12.1 The Place of Formal Logic in Legal Reasoning
12.2 A Focus on Framework
12.3 Logic as a Metalanguage for Argument
12.4 Logic’s Persuasive Force
12.5 A New Way of Thinking about Logic and Legal Argument—and Jazz
12.6 Chapter Twelve in Review
Appendices: Exercises: Solutions and Discussions
Appendix A Chapter Five: Breslin Real Estate Group, LLC d/b/a Breslin Real Estate Solutions v. Elderberry Software and Media, Inc .
Appendix B Chapter Six: Annalise Forester v. Graham C. Hayes
Appendix C Chapter Seven: Mack Bryce v. Eastern Ohio College
Appendix D Chapter Eight: SquareBarrell Solutions, LLC v. Interior Diameter, Inc.
Appendix E Chapter Nine: Toy-Vo, Inc. d/b/a Toypocalypse v. Collin Lewis
Appendix F Chapter Ten: Marathon Logistics III, Inc. v. Brule River Capital, LP
Index
← Prev
Back
Next →
← Prev
Back
Next →