An epistemological theory of argumentation for adversarial legal proceedings

Abstract

The rhetorical view (R) suggests that the goal of factual argumentation in legal proceedings is to persuade the fact-finder about the facts under litigation. However, R does not capture our social expectations: we want fact-finders to know the facts justifying their decisions, and persuasion does not necessarily lead to knowledge. I want to present an epistemic theory of argumentation honoring our expectations. Under my account, factual argumentation aims to transmit knowledge to the fact-finder.