Tuesday, December 6, 2016

Old-School Rhetoric and New-School Cognitive Science: The Enduring Power of Logocentric Categories by Lucy A. Jewel

Here is a fascinating article that examines legal reasoning through the lens of cognitive science:

Old-School Rhetoric and New-School Cognitive Science: The Enduring Power of Logocentric Categories by Lucy A. Jewel.

Abstract:     

"For thousands of years, the format and structure of legal arguments have not changed. Drawing upon legal history, jurisprudential trends, and cognitive science studies, this article theorizes that ancient legal thought structures have stayed with us so long because they offer a way to present complex information in a clean and structured way. Explicitly teaching students that categories can be consciously constructed in a broad or narrow fashion gives them a special set of tools that will help them move from a lay understanding of law to a professional understanding of the law and lawyering.

This article proceeds in three parts. A combination of descriptive explanation and critique, Part One provides an overview of classical legal thought structures, explains the infrastructural role this type of thinking plays in U.S. legal culture, and considers the potential for injustice when classical legal thought structures are used uncritically. Part One also draws upon the work of cognitive scientists to explain how classical legal thought patterns do not accurately represent how we really think."
 

 

http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/legal_skills/2016/12/old-school-rhetoric-and-new-school-cognitive-science-the-enduring-power-of-logocentric-categories-by.html

| Permalink

Comments

Post a comment