New Rhetorics for Contemporary Legal Discourse

The collection of 11 essays explores the relationship between general and particular in legal rhetorics, the function of singular events, facts, and names in legal argumentation, and their relationship to legal normativity from a diachronic perspective.

Format: Paperback / softback
Length: 184 pages
Publication date: 28 February 2022
Publisher: Edinburgh University Press

Are the general and the particular separated in legal rhetorics? What is the function of singular events, facts, names in legal argumentation, and what is their relationship to legal normativity?

This comprehensive collection of 11 essays adopts a diachronic approach to explore these critical inquiries within the realm of contemporary legal discourse.

In legal rhetorics, the distinction between the general and the particular is a fundamental aspect that shapes the way arguments are constructed and interpreted. The general refers to broad principles, theories, or legal doctrines that apply to a wide range of situations. On the other hand, the particular refers to specific facts, cases, or legal incidents that are relevant to the particular dispute at hand.

The separation of the general and the particular is crucial in legal argumentation for several reasons. Firstly, it allows for the development of a clear and focused argument that is tailored to the specific facts and circumstances of the case. By identifying the relevant general principles or legal doctrines, lawyers can then apply them to the particular facts to support their client's position.

Secondly, the separation of the general and the particular helps to ensure that legal arguments are based on sound reasoning and evidence. General principles and legal doctrines are generally accepted as valid and reliable, whereas specific facts and cases may be subject to debate and interpretation. By grounding legal arguments in the particular, lawyers can provide a more robust and persuasive case that is more likely to be accepted by the court or other decision-makers.

Thirdly, the separation of the general and the particular allows for the development of legal precedent and the establishment of legal norms. When a court makes a decision based on a particular set of facts and circumstances, it creates a legal precedent that can be relied upon in future cases with similar facts. This helps to establish a common understanding of the law and promotes legal certainty and stability.

However, the relationship between the general and the particular in legal argumentation is not always straightforward. Sometimes, general principles and legal doctrines can be applied to specific cases in ways that may seem contradictory or inconsistent. This can lead to legal disputes and challenges to established legal norms.

In conclusion, the general and the particular are distinct categories in legal rhetorics that play a crucial role in legal argumentation. The separation of these categories allows for the development of clear and focused arguments, the establishment of sound reasoning and evidence, and the development of legal precedent and norms. However, the relationship between the general and the particular is complex and can sometimes lead to legal disputes and challenges to established legal norms.

Weight: 263g
Dimension: 234 x 156 x 10 (mm)
ISBN-13: 9781474450577