The Tapestry of Reason: An Inquiry into the Nature of Coherence and its Role in Legal Argument (European Academy of Legal Theory Series)

In recent years, coherence theories of law and adjudication have been extremely influential in legal scholarship. These theories significantly advance the case for coherentism in law. Nonetheless, in the field of coherence theory in law, a number of problems remain. This ambitious new study develops a coherence-based theory of legal reasoning and, in so doing, addresses or at least mitigates these problems. The book is organized in three parts. The first part provides a critical analysis of the main coherentist approaches to both normative and factual reasoning in law. The second part investigates coherence theory in a number of fields that are relevant to law: coherence theories of epistemic justification \* coherentist approaches to belief revision and theory-choice \* coherence theories of practical and moral reasoning \* coherence-based approaches to discourse interpretation. Taking this interdisciplinary analysis as a starting point, the third part of the book develops a coherence-based model of legal reasoning. While this model builds upon the standard theory of legal reasoning, it also leads to rethinking some of the basic assumptions that characterize this theory and suggests some lines along which it may be further developed. Thus, ultimately, the book not only improves upon the current state of coherence theory in law, but also contributes to the larger debate about how to articulate a theory of legal reasoning that results in better decision-making. (Series: European Academy of Legal Theory) Cover 1 Half-title 3 Title 5 Copyright 6 Acknowledgements 9 Contents 13 Introduction 17 PART I: LEGAL COHERENTISM 25 1. Normative Coherence, Justification and Interpretation 27 I. Coherence and Rationality in Legal Reasoning 28 II. A Weigh and Balance Model for Legal Coherence 39 III. Integrity, Holism and Interpretation 54 IV. Objections Against Coherence Theories of Legal Reasoning about Norms 73 V. Conclusions 89 2. Coherence, Evidence and Proof 91 I. Probabilism and Evidential Reasoning in Law 92 II. Holistic Theories of Evidence and Legal Proof 110 III. Coherence and the Psychology of Legal Decision-Making 119 IV. Narrative Coherence in Legal Reasoning about Facts 132 V. Critiques to Coherence Theories of Fact-Reasoning in Law 140 VI. Conclusions 148 PART II: INTERDISCIPLINARY PERSPECTIVES 151 3. Coherence, Knowledge and Justification 153 I. Coherence, Foundations and the Structure of Epistemic Justification 153 II. BonJour’s Epistemic Coherentism 161 III. Lehrer’s Coherence Theory of Knowledge 178 IV. The Current State of the Coherence Theory of Epistemic Justification 194 V. Contextualism, Coherence and Epistemic Justification 203 VI. Conclusions 209 4. Explanatory Coherentism 211 I. Explanationism 212 II. Coherence as Constraint Satisfaction 225 III. The Theory of Explanatory Coherence 229 IV. Non-Explanatory Kinds of Coherence 236 V. A Unified Account of Coherence-based Inference 241 VI. Challenges to Explanatory Coherentism 254 VII. Conclusions 259 5. Coherence and Belief Dynamics 261 I. The AGM Model 263 II. AGM as a Coherence Theory of Belief Revision 273 III. Hansson’s Theory of Semi-Revision 277 IV. Olsson on Coherence and Belief Revision 279 V. Belief Revision and Coherentist Epistemology 289 VI. Conclusions 294 6. Is Coherence Truth-Conducive 297 I. Coherence, Realism and Anti-Realism 298 II. Coherence, Truth and Interpretation 304 III. Probability, Coherence and Truth 315 IV. The Problem of Metajustification 323 V. Conclusions 326 7. Practical Coherence 329 I. Specificationism 331 II. Coherentist Case-based Deliberation 346 III. Inference to the Most Coherent Plan 364 IV. Conclusions 372 8. Beyond Reflective Equilibrium 377 I. The Method of Reflective Equilibrium 379 II. Balance and Refinement 389 III. Reasoning from Analogy and Difference 401 IV. Ethical Coherence as Constraint Satisfaction 409 V. Coherence, Truth and Objectivity in Ethics 417 VI. Conclusions 431 9. Discourse Coherence 435 I. The Notion of Coherence in Discourse Theory 436 II. Theories of Discourse Coherence 444 III. Coherence, Knowledge and Inference 452 IV. A Relevance Critique to Coherence Theories of Discourse 459 V. Coherence, Context and Rationality 470 VI. Conclusions 483 PART III: COHERENCE AND REASON IN LAW 485 10. A Coherence Theory of Legal Reasoning 487 I. Redrawing a Map of Problems 488 II. The Building Blocks of the Coherence Theory 493 III. Legal Coherence as Constraint Satisfaction 503 IV. Inference to the Best Legal Explanation 519 V. Legal Justification by Optimal Coherence 536 VI. Coherence in Context 541 VII. The Problems of Coherentism Revisited 547 VIII. The Reasons for Coherence 551 IX. Coherence, Legal Reasoning and Legal Theory 560 X. Conclusions 567 References 575 Index 621 -- Acknowledgements -- Introduction -- Part I. Legal Coherentism -- 1. Normative Coherence, Justification and Interpretation -- I. Coherence and Rationality in Legal Reasoning -- II. A Weigh and Balance Model for Legal Coherence -- III. Integrity, Holism and Interpretation -- IV. Objections Against Coherence Theories of Legal -- Reasoning about Norms -- V. Conclusions -- 2. Coherence, Evidence and Proof -- I. Probabilism and Evidential Reasoning in Law -- II. Holistic Theories of Evidence and Legal Proof -- III. Coherence and the Psychology of Legal -- Decision-Making -- IV. Narrative Coherence in Legal Reasoning about Facts -- V. Critiques to Coherence Theories of Fact-Reasoning in Law -- VI. Conclusions -- Part II. Interdisciplinary Perspectives -- 3. Coherence, Knowledge and Justification -- I. Coherence, Foundations and the Structure of Epistemic -- Justification -- II. BonJour's Epistemic Coherentism -- III. Lehrer's Coherence Theory of Knowledge -- IV. The Current State of the Coherence Theory of Epistemic Justification -- V. Contextualism, Coherence and Epistemic Justification -- VI. Conclusions -- 4. Explanatory Coherentism -- I. Explanationism -- II. Coherence as Constraint Satisfaction -- III. The Theory of Explanatory Coherence -- IV. Non-Explanatory Kinds of Coherence -- xii Contents -- V. A Unified Account of Coherence-based Inference -- VI. Challenges to Explanatory Coherentism -- VII. Conclusions -- 5. Coherence and Belief Dynamics -- I. The AGM Model -- II. AGM as a Coherence Theory of Belief Revision -- III. Hansson's Theory of Semi-Revision -- IV. Olsson on Coherence and Belief Revision -- V. Belief Revision and Coherentist Epistemology -- VI. Conclusions -- 6. Is Coherence Truth-Conducive? -- I. Coherence, Realism and Anti-Realism -- II. Coherence, Truth and Interpretation -- III. Probability, Coherence and Truth -- IV. The Problem of Metajustification -- V. Conclusions -- 7. Practical Coherence -- I. Specificationism -- II. Coherentist Case-based Deliberation -- III. Inference to the Most Coherent Plan -- IV. Conclusions -- 8. Beyond Reflective Equilibrium -- I. The Method of Reflective Equilibrium -- II. Balance and Refinement -- III. Reasoning from Analogy and Difference -- IV. Ethical Coherence as Constraint Satisfaction -- V. Coherence, Truth and Objectivity in Ethics -- VI. Conclusions -- 9. Discourse Coherence -- I. The Notion of Coherence in Discourse Theory -- II. Theories of Discourse Coherence -- III. Coherence, Knowledge and Inference -- IV. A Relevance Critique to Coherence Theories of Discourse -- V. Coherence, Context and Rationality -- VI. Conclusions -- Part III. Coherence and Reason in Law -- 10. A Coherence Theory of Legal Reasoning -- I. Redrawing a Map of Problems -- II. The Building Blocks of the Coherence Theory -- III. Legal Coherence as Constraint Satisfaction -- IV. Inference to the Best Legal Explanation -- V. Legal Justification by Optimal Coherence -- VI. Coherence in Context -- VII The Problems of Coherentism Revisited -- VIII. The Reasons for Coherence -- IX. Coherence, Legal Reasoning and Legal Theory -- X. Conclusions -- References -- Index. Recently Legal Scholarship Has Been Heavily Influenced By Coherence Theories Of Law And Adjudication. These Theories Significantly Advance The Case For Coherentism In Law, Yet A Number Of Problems Remain. This Ambitious New Work Is The First To Develop A Coherence-based Theory Of Legal Reasoning, And In So Doing Address, Or At Least Mitigate, These Problems. The Book Is Organised In Three Parts. Part One Critically Analyses The Main Coherentist Approaches To Both Normative And Factual Reasoning In Law. Part Two Investigates Coherence Theory In A Number Of Fields That Are Relevant To Law: Coherence Theories Of Epistemic Justification, Coherentist Approaches To Belief Revision And Theory-choice, Coherence Theories Of Practical And Moral Reasoning And Coherence-based Approaches To Discourse Interpretation. Taking This Interdisciplinary Analysis As A Starting Point, Part Three Develops A Coherence-based Model Of Legal Reasoning, Building Upon The Standard Theory Of Legal Reasoning, Leading To A Reconsideration Of Some Of The Basic Assumptions That Characterise This Theory And Suggesting Some Lines Along Which It May Be Further Developed. Thus, The Book Not Only Improves Upon The Current State Of Coherence Theory In Law, But Also Helps To Articulate A Theory Of Legal Reasoning That Results In Better Decision-making.-- Introduction -- Normative Coherence : Justification And Interpretation -- Coherence, Evidence And Proof -- Coherence, Knowledge And Justification -- Explanatory Coherentism -- Coherence And Belief Dynamics -- Is Coherence Truth-conducive? -- Practical Coherence -- Beyond Reflective Equilibrium -- Discourse Coherence -- A Coherence Theory Of Legal Reasoning. Amalia Amaya. Includes Bibliographical References (pages 559-604) And Index. "In recent years coherence theories of law and adjudication have been extremely influential in legal scholarship. These theories significantly advance the case for coherentism in law. Nonetheless, in the field of coherence theory in law a number of problems remain. This ambitious new work makes the first concerted attempt to develop a coherence-based theory of legal reasoning, and in so doing addresses, or at least mitigates these problems. The book is organised in three parts. The first part provides a critical analysis of the main coherentist approaches to both normative and factual reasoning in law. The second part investigates coherence theory in a number of fields that are relevant to law: coherence theories of epistemic justification, coherentist approaches to belief revision and theory-choice, coherence theories of practical and moral reasoning, and coherence-based approaches to discourse interpretation. Taking this interdisciplinary analysis as a starting point, the third part develops a coherence-based model of legal reasoning. While this model builds upon the standard theory of legal reasoning, it also leads to rethinking some of the basic assumptions that characterise this theory, and suggests some lines along which it may be further developed. Thus, ultimately, the book not only improves upon the current state of coherence theory in law, but also contributes to the larger debate about how to articulate a theory of legal reasoning that results in better decision-making."--Bloomsbury Publishing. In recent years coherence theories of law and adjudication have been extremely influential in legal scholarship. These theories significantly advance the case for coherentism in law. Nonetheless, there remain a number of problems in the coherence theory in law. This ambitious new work makes the first concerted attempt to develop a coherence-based theory of legal reasoning, and in so doing addresses, or at least mitigates these problems. The book is organized in three parts. The first part provides a critical analysis of the main coherentist approaches to both normative and factual reasoning in law. The second part investigates the coherence theory in a number of fields that are relevant to law: coherence theories of epistemic justification, coherentist approaches to belief revision and theory-choice in science, coherence theories of practical and moral reasoning and coherence-based approaches to discourse interpretation. Taking this interdisciplinary analysis as a starting point, the third part develops a coherence-based model of legal reasoning. While this model builds upon the standard theory of legal reasoning, it also leads to rethinking some of the basic assumptions that characterize this theory, and suggests some lines along which it may be further developed. Thus, ultimately, the book not only improves upon the current state of coherence theory in law, but also contributes to the larger debate about how to articulate a theory of legal reasoning that results in better decision-making.