Legal Reasoning

CLASS NOTES: 1 S T SEMESTER

 Legal Reasoning
Legal reasoning as a concept is a process of thinking which helps a
researcher to come to decision relating to the law.
Every decision must be guided and followed by a logical reasoning
which takes into account the past decisions and statutes, the present
position of the parties to the cases, and its own impact on future
activity.
 Judge Made Law and Legal Reasoning
Legal research consists of analysis of rules, principles, institutions and systems related to law.
These analysis can help in deriving appropriate conclusion when supported by logic.
The statutes, principles or precedents might not be applicable in a unprecedented situation. In
such circumstances relationship between new situation and existing legal provision has to be
established. The logic serves as a tool for the judges to reach to a conclusion.
Similarly, in the situations where there are no any existing rule, the judges have to enact an
appropriate law (precedent) to resolve the problem.
Many jurist believe that the language of judicial decisions is merely the language of logic. Where
as many other jurists i.e. Cardozo, Justice Holmes argue that logic is not relevant for legal
reasoning.
Deductive and Inductive Reasoning
Deductive reasoning and inductive reasoning are two different approaches.
1. Deductive reasoning: A researcher tests a theory by collecting and examining empirical
evidence to see if it is true. This form of research begins at a general, abstract level, and
then works its way down to a more specific and concrete level.
2. Inductive reasoning : A researcher first gathers and analyzes data, then constructs a theory
to explain the findings.
Most studies involve both inductive and deductive reasoning throughout the research process.
These scientific norm of logical reasoning provides a two-way bridge between theory and
research.
 Deductive Reasoning
The method of studying a phenomenon by taking some assumptions and deducting conclusions
from these assumptions is known as the deductive method.
i. Deduction is a process of reasoning from the general to particular or from the universe to
individual, from given premises to necessary conclusions.
ii. Deduction is also known as analytical or abstract method.
iii. Deductive logic uses a general statement as the basis of argument. Core of the common
forms of deductive logic are syllogism.
iv. It is important to the legal system since it provides a foundation for conclusions.
 Syllogism
Syllogism is a form of deductive reasoning where one arrives at a specific conclusion by
examining two other premises or ideas. Syllogism derives from the Greek word syllogismos,
meaning conclusion or inference.
Some syllogisms contain three components:
Major Premise: All law schools teach about research.
Minor Premise: I am a law student.
Conclusion: Hence, I will study about research.
 Merits and Demerits of Deductive
Reasoning
Merits
It is a powerful tool.
It is simple method based on inferences.
It can serve as a substitute for experimentation.
Demerits
It is applicable to limited researches.
The assumptions must be valid for the result to be
true.
It requires high degree of logic and reasoning.
 Inductive Reasoning
Inductive reasoning begins with specific observations or real examples of events, trends, or social processes
and progresses analytically to broader generalizations and theories based on those observed cases.
i. This is sometimes called a “bottom up” approach because it starts with specific cases on the ground
and works its way up to the abstract level of theory.
ii. This method examines various causes one after another and tries to establish causal relations between
them.
iii. General principles are laid down after examining a large number of special instances or facts. The
method is said to be ‘empirical’ because the formulation of principle is made only after an extensive
compilation of the raw data of experience.
• A person named A died.
• So did B and so on.
• Conclusion: All human are mortal.
 Merits and Demerits of Inductive
Reasoning
Merits
Inductive reasoning used when there is
insufficient precedent, no clear statute or no
major premise.
The propositions can be tested and verified
easily.
This method takes into consideration the
changeable nature of assumptions in its analysis.
Demerits
Inductive reasoning is easy to understand but hard
to apply.
It is not always accurate to assume that a general
principle is correct based on a limited number of
cases.
There is a danger of bias, since this method relies
on data collected by the investigator.