Logic and Reasoning in Law: A Foundation for Legal Argumentation, Essays (high school) of Philosophy

Answering questions on Logic related to philosophy

Typology: Essays (high school)

2019/2020

Uploaded on 08/18/2023

muaz-shah
muaz-shah 🇵🇰

5 documents

1 / 3

Toggle sidebar

This page cannot be seen from the preview

Don't miss anything!

bg1
Logic and reasoning
Law is not always concerned with promoting morality, but at the very least, it
should never promote immorality. Immoral laws will be ignored by the populace.
The law of human is derived from religion, religion is the basic grounds on which the morality is set, as
the very first basis of any law was set by the religion, in the initial times the law and morality was not
different, they were equal as the morality and law were the same thing back then, with the development of
the society from communities into nations the law has changed drastically as the system has advanced for
justice which has derived morality apart from the law.
The system of justice after the government has advanced has changed as the people now live secularly,
instead of living in communities, people live in diversity having multiple communities and cultures
living together, this has caused the grounds of morality to be unequal which has forced law to derive
morality apart, now the law can be based on morality but it isn't necessary for a law to based on morality,
instead it should be based on equity. For example the aborton as a birth control, this caused a catastrophic
event in the history of western world as this was an immoral law and people at large opposed it, this
showed us that immoral laws will not be accepted by the public at large and would cause chaos in
between the government and the people. Despite not being moral the laws should not be immoral for the
public to accept it. The laws can be amoral as well and public would not mind the law to be amoral as it
would not conflict with people’s interest and going against their moral ideas would be going against
religion and we have seen the greatest tragedies of the world to occur due to religion.
To conclude, the laws would be opposed by the public if they are immoral as they would be against the
basic fundamental of that society, as we live in a democracy and the basic of a democracy is “for the
people, of the people, by the people” this clearly shows that a state in democracy run by the will of
people, as it will violate the basic moral of its citizen then the citizen would either reject the law or would
either reject the government
Lawyers need to understand logical reasoning if they are going to be able to understand
law itself, because most laws, most of the time, are based on logic.
Lawyers need to understand logic as the logic is the understanding between wrong and write and is
thinking of rationality, in the times we are living in rationality is the biggest factor of determining
anything, including law. Law these days are based on rationality and logic because the world we live in
now is a democratic society, where the laws are made through joint committees and through calculation,
instead of being made by a monarch that would enforce any law as he wished. Furthermore, logic is
essential for lawyers because the main purpose a lawyer is to understand and argue for the law, a lawyer
needs to interpret the law and the intention of the law making body merely through the word available to
him, this requires a high understanding of logic as the would interpret these arguments and would then
pf3

Partial preview of the text

Download Logic and Reasoning in Law: A Foundation for Legal Argumentation and more Essays (high school) Philosophy in PDF only on Docsity!

Logic and reasoning

Law is not always concerned with promoting morality, but at the very least, it

should never promote immorality. Immoral laws will be ignored by the populace.

The law of human is derived from religion, religion is the basic grounds on which the morality is set, as the very first basis of any law was set by the religion, in the initial times the law and morality was not different, they were equal as the morality and law were the same thing back then, with the development of the society from communities into nations the law has changed drastically as the system has advanced for justice which has derived morality apart from the law. The system of justice after the government has advanced has changed as the people now live secularly, instead of living in communities, people live in diversity having multiple communities and cultures living together, this has caused the grounds of morality to be unequal which has forced law to derive morality apart, now the law can be based on morality but it isn't necessary for a law to based on morality, instead it should be based on equity. For example the aborton as a birth control, this caused a catastrophic event in the history of western world as this was an immoral law and people at large opposed it, this showed us that immoral laws will not be accepted by the public at large and would cause chaos in between the government and the people. Despite not being moral the laws should not be immoral for the public to accept it. The laws can be amoral as well and public would not mind the law to be amoral as it would not conflict with people’s interest and going against their moral ideas would be going against religion and we have seen the greatest tragedies of the world to occur due to religion. To conclude, the laws would be opposed by the public if they are immoral as they would be against the basic fundamental of that society, as we live in a democracy and the basic of a democracy is “for the people, of the people, by the people” this clearly shows that a state in democracy run by the will of people, as it will violate the basic moral of its citizen then the citizen would either reject the law or would either reject the government

Lawyers need to understand logical reasoning if they are going to be able to understand

law itself, because most laws, most of the time, are based on logic.

Lawyers need to understand logic as the logic is the understanding between wrong and write and is thinking of rationality, in the times we are living in rationality is the biggest factor of determining anything, including law. Law these days are based on rationality and logic because the world we live in now is a democratic society, where the laws are made through joint committees and through calculation, instead of being made by a monarch that would enforce any law as he wished. Furthermore, logic is essential for lawyers because the main purpose a lawyer is to understand and argue for the law, a lawyer needs to interpret the law and the intention of the law making body merely through the word available to him, this requires a high understanding of logic as the would interpret these arguments and would then

relay this in layman terms so that a normal person can understand it as well, there are many other argumentative authorities is provided to us by logic. Starting from telling us the very basic types of argument like deductive and inductive. An inductive argument is an argument incorporating the claim that it is improbable that the conclusion be false given that the premises are true. A deductive argument is an argument incorporating the claim that it is impossible for the conclusion. Furthermore, after these the major classifications it provides us sub classifications for the arguments under these main arguments, these are mentioned below. Arguments based on maths An argument based of maths is an arguments where the concussion is properly calculated and is purely based on maths with a accurate conclusion Argument from definition These types of arguments are purely based on the definition of a word Prediction These type of arguments are basically dependent of probabilities as these arguments are made with limited information being available for the subject matter and we ake an assumption on the basis of available data Arguments by analogy These arguments are based on comparison between two similar or different things, where people compare them with each other to get to a conclusion Generalization These type of arguments are basically called looking at the bigger picture, where you use generalize information being available to us to judge an individual Argument by authority These type of arguments are basically used to conclude a subject or to give an order based on the evidence available Arguments based on signs These arguments are used basically for arguing the visual effects of things, like a street sign where you can conclude something through visual effects Casual interference