Rule Synthesis and Explanatory Synthesis: A Socratic Dialogue between IREAC and TREAT

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

This Article explores the theory and process of explanatory synthesis in comparison to rule synthesis and case-to-case analogical reasoning as a method of demonstrative legal reasoning and analysis and legal rhetoric. The Article takes the form of a Socratic dialogue to discuss the analytical and rhetorical advantages of explanatory synthesis. Explanatory synthesis provides an important option for inductive reasoning and argumentation within the deductive paradigm of legal analysis, and has rhetorical advantages over other forms of analogical reasoning when examined using the tools of modern argument theory and the rhetorical canons of law and economics.
Original languageAmerican English
JournalLegal Communication & Rhetoric: JALWD
Volume8
StatePublished - Jun 30 2011

Keywords

  • legal analysis
  • legal reasoning
  • rhetoric
  • legal rhetoric
  • modern argument theory
  • synthesis
  • explanatory synthesis
  • rule synthesis
  • paradigm

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Rule Synthesis and Explanatory Synthesis: A Socratic Dialogue between IREAC and TREAT'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this