JONA I LLENSLOGIC ASSIGNEMENT

ASSIGNMENT:

1. RELATIONSHIP OF LAW AND LOGIC

The relation between Law and logic has been governed as many of the most intense relationships are, by both a strong attraction and persistent strife. On the one hand, law- is rich and diverse palette of reasoning forms and with its large social relevance- has appealed to logicians as an ideal field for application and experimentation. Moreover legal reasoning represents a middle way between formal inference and common sense thinking; Even thought legal discourse is not formal, it tends to appear in uniform and relatively structured ways, so that its patterns can be made accessible to logical analysis.

Logic with its capability of providing instruments for rational thinking- has appeared to many lawyers as a necessary tool for improving legal reasoning and communication.

The relationship between Law and Logic has not always been that of peaceful cooperation. Both partners have felt at certain times, deep reciprocal distrust, accompanied sometimes by indifference of open attack. The Lawyers may resent being described as logical or formalist by which the lawyer may understand “pedantic and non-creative” and in the same way a logician may resent beint attributed lawyerlike captiousness and verbosity.

2. CRITICAL THINKING Critical thinking is clear, reasoned thinking involving critique. Its details vary amongst those who define it. According to Beyer (1995), critical thinking means making clear, reasoned judgments. During the process of critical thinking, ideas should be reasoned and well thought out/judged.[1] The National Council for Excellence in Critical Thinking [2]

defines critical thinking as the intellectually disciplined process of actively and skillfully conceptualizing, applying, analyzing, synthesizing, and/or evaluating information gathered from, or generated by, observation, experience, reflection, reasoning, or communication, as a guide to belief and action.'

Critical thinking calls for the ability to:

Recognize problems, to find workable means for meeting those problems Understand the importance of prioritization and order of precedence in problem solving

Gather and marshal pertinent (relevant) information

Recognize unstated assumptions and values

Comprehend and use language with accuracy, clarity, and discernment

Interpret data, to appraise evidence and evaluate arguments

Recognize the existence (or non-existence) of logical relationships between propositions

Draw warranted conclusions and generalizations

Put to test the conclusions and generalizations at which one arrives

Reconstruct one's patterns of beliefs on the basis of wider experience

Render accurate judgments about specific things and qualities in everyday life

3. Read the following articles and prepare a one page comment/reaction (soft copy).

LOGIC IN THE LAW BY ROBERT S. SUMMERS

COMMENTS /REACTIONS:

Logic as defined in the Online Webster dictionary as the ; a proper or reasonable way of thinking about or understanding something; a particular way of thinking about something; the science that studies the formal processes used in thinking and reasoning. For this Article is merely discussed the Logic in the Law, on my understanding it’s explain how is logic in the study of law.

From the Paragraph A working legal system must…be willing to pick out key similarities and to reason from them to the justice of applying a common classification. The existence of some facts in common brings into play the general rule, author wanted us to get the importance and logic in making a decision or analysis to any case.

This way of putting " the problem " is especially relevant in those fields of law in which case authority is plentiful and stare decisis important. To conclude, neither Guest's analysis nor mine examines all of the problems of characterizing legal reasoning. Although it would be rash for either of us to claim finality for our analyses, it may not be rash to hope that these will ignite some flickers of interest among those best qualified to judge.

Guest wanted the judges to look in the Analysis aside from the decided case or the doctrine of State Decisis, and examines all the problems characterizing legal reasoning.

2. LOGIC FOR LAW STUDENTS BY RUGGERO J. ALDISERT, STEPHEN CLOWNEY AND JEREMY D. PETERSON

I really like this Article this made realize how important to study logic in law school and how to think as a Lawyer, which is means employing logic to construct arguments. It also states that a person familiar with the basics of logical thinking is more like to argue effective than one who is not.

I agree with that author says that the Prospective Lawyers should make themselves intimately familiar with the fundamentals deductive reasoning, which it is based on the act of

proving a conclusion by means of two other propositions. This really can help lawyers and judge solve legal problems not controlled by precedent and help law students deflect the nasty hypothetical that are the darlings of professor.

This idea to shape a legal issue in the form of syllogism could help me to give a good analysis on the problems during the exams, first is to state the general rule , next is to check on the minor premises or the key facts of the legal problem and last one is to draw conclusion by examining how the major premises about the law applies.

“An argument that is correctly reasoned maybe wrong but an argument that is incorrectly reasoned can never be right”, which is true it really important to Law student and lawyer to have the correct reasoning through Logic.