A Generalizable Argument Structure Using Defeasible Class-inclusion Transitivity for Evaluating Evidentiary Probative Relevancy in Litigation

Abstract

A new argument structure based on defeasible class-inclusion transitivity (DCIT) is proposed as a generalizable structure for evaluating probative relevancy determinations in litigation across typical evidentiary fact patterns. The general applicability for deductive inferences can be seen through the use of Sommers term-functor logic (TFL) principles to regiment premises into a DCIT structure. Its generalizability for inductive and presumptive (e.g. plausibilistic) inferences can be demonstrated by translating a variety of informal logic structures (e.g. Toulmin, argument schemes, Wigmorean charts and conventional box and arrow diagrams) into a DCIT argument structure. A proper use of a DCIT structure demonstrates whether the item of evidence offered to be admitted in the trial and the ultimate probandum of the case (e.g. the defendant is guilty of murder) are linked within a single structurally correct argument. A DCIT perspective also provides a coherent metaphorical explanation of the concepts of probative force, probative weight, linked and convergent premises and inference.

DOI: 10.1093/logcom/exp066

51 Figures and Tables

Cite this paper

@article{Laronge2012AGA, title={A Generalizable Argument Structure Using Defeasible Class-inclusion Transitivity for Evaluating Evidentiary Probative Relevancy in Litigation}, author={Joseph A. Laronge}, journal={J. Log. Comput.}, year={2012}, volume={22}, pages={129-162} }