Cover not available

In:Contextualizing Pragma-Dialectics
Edited by Frans H. van Eemeren and Peng Wu
[Argumentation in Context 12] 2017
► pp. 59–76

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload Book PDF
authorization required

Chapter 4
The role of the judge in legal proceedings

A pragma-dialectical analysis

Published online: 12 December 2017
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/aic.12.04fet
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.The institutional implementation of a critical discussion in legal proceedings
    • 2.1The resolution of legal disputes and the administration of justice in accordance with the Rule of Law
    • 2.2 The implementation of the ideal of a critical discussion in legal proceedings
  • 3.The role of the judge in an impartial and final resolution of the dispute
    • 3.1The dialectical position of the judge
    • 3.2The role of the judge in the various discussion stages
      • The confrontation stage
      • The opening stage
      • The argumentation stage
      • The concluding stage
  • 4. Conclusion
  • Notes
  • References
References (20)
References
Aarnio, A. (1977). On legal reasoning. Turku: Turun Yliopisto.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Alexy, R. (1978). Theorie der juristischen Argumentation. Die Theorie des rationalen Diskurses als Theorie der juristischen Begründung. Frankfurt a.M.: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Eemeren, F. H. van & R. Grootendorst (1984). Speech acts in argumentative discussions. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(1988a). Rationale for a pragma-dialectical perspective. Argumentation 2, 271–291. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(1988b). Rules for argumentation in dialogues. Argumentation 2, 499–510. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(1992). Argumentation, communication, and fallacies. A pragma-dialectical perspective. Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2004). A systematic theory of argumentation. The pragma-dialectical approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Feteris, E. T. (1990). Conditions and rules for rational Discussion in a legal process. A pragma-dialectical perspective. Argumentation and Advocacy 26, 2, 108–117.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(1993). Rationality in legal discussions. A pragma-dialectical perspective. Informal Logic, 15, 3, 179–188. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(1995). The analysis and evaluation of legal argumentation from a pragma-dialectical perspective. In: F. H. van Eemeren, R. Grootendorst, J. A. Blair, Ch. A. Willard (eds.), Proceedings of the Third ISSA Conference on Argumentation, Vol. IV (pp. 42–51) Amsterdam: Sic Sat.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(1999). Fundamentals of legal argumentation. A survey of theories on the justification of judicial decisions. Dordrecht etc.: Kluwer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2003). Habermas′ discourse theory and the rationality of law: the complementary relationship between the ideal of communicative rationality and legal discussions. Informal Logic, 23, 2, 139–159.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Habermas, J. (1988). The Tanner lectures on human values, 8,. Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(1992). Faktizität und Geltung. Beiträge zur Diskurstheorie des Rechts und des demokratischen Rechtsstaats. Frankfurt a.M.: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
MacCormick, N. (2005). Rhetoric and the rule of law. A theory of legal reasoning. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
MacCormick, N. & R. Summers (1991). Interpreting statutes. A comparative study. Aldershot etc.: Dartmouth.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Peczenik, A. (1983). The basis of legal justification. Internal publication University of Lund. Lund.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Perelman, C., and L. Olbrechts-Tyteca (1958). La nouvelle rhétorique. Traité de l’argumentation. Brussels, l’Université de Bruxelles.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Toulmin, S. E. (1958). The uses of argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Olayinka Unuabonah, Foluke
2020. Argumentation in Nigerian investigative public hearings. Journal of Argumentation in Context 9:2 ► pp. 199 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 8 march 2026. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue