Dual-Process Cognition and Legal Reasoning

被引:0
作者
Ronkainen, Anna [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Helsinki, FIN-00014 Helsinki, Finland
来源
ARGUMENTATION 2011: INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ALTERNATIVE METHODS OF ARGUMENTATION IN LAW | 2011年
关键词
legal reasoning; legal decision-making; justification; dual process theory; RATIONALITY; DECISIONS; LANGUAGE;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
D9 [法律]; DF [法律];
学科分类号
0301 ;
摘要
The dual-process framework is a set of theories on human cognition in which cognition is seen as consisting of (at least) two substantially different yet interdependent systems: the older, faster, partly unconscious and automatic System 1 and the newer, slower, fully conscious and considered System 2. When viewing legal reasoning through the dual-process model, we can easily see that System 1 is primarily responsible for deciding a case (or finding the best line of arguments in support of a party) with the help of aligning the particulars of the case with the preexisting framework of statute and case law, whereas System 2 is responsible for generating and evaluating arguments in support of the outcome determined by System 1, thereby opening up an individual's reasoning process for external critique. System 2 may also override System 1 altogether, but this is only possible in easy cases. In part thanks to the dual-process framework we can take a scientific look into the often discussed but substantially neglected question of Right Answers in law through empirically testable hypotheses. This also has significant implications for artificial intelligence and law. By acknowledging the differences between the two, we can better use the most suitable computational models for each of them individually.
引用
收藏
页码:1 / 32
页数:32
相关论文
共 63 条
[1]  
Alexy Robert., 1978, Theorie der juristischen Argumentation: Die Theorie des rationalen Diskurses als Theorie der juristischen Begrilndung, V1st
[2]  
[Anonymous], 1999, WHO IS RATIONAL STUD
[3]  
[Anonymous], 2009, 2 MINDS DUAL PROCESS
[4]  
[Anonymous], 2001, The new phrenology
[5]  
[Anonymous], 2008, JUDGES THINK
[6]  
[Anonymous], 1965, Aspects of the Theory of Syntax
[7]  
[Anonymous], 1881, COMMON LAW
[8]  
[Anonymous], 2009, THINKING LAWYER NEW
[9]  
[Anonymous], 2008, Rationality for mortals: how people cope with uncertainty
[10]  
[Anonymous], 2011, RATIONALITY REFLECTI, DOI DOI 10.1093/ACPROF:OSO/9780195341140.003.0002