1 How to learn and How to teach the Law Studying Law Teaching Law Teaching is Learning Conclusion KAGAYAMA Shigeru Professor emeritus of Nagoya University.

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

3.5 – Analyzing Arguments with Euler Diagrams

Advertisements

DEDUCTIVE vs. INDUCTIVE REASONING

Public Speaking And how to work with it in a rhetorical perspective Ida Borch Odense Technical College/Tietgen Business College April 2003.

Logic and Reasoning Panther Prep North Central High School.

Taming the Warrant notes from article by James E. Warren from English Journal 99.6 (2010):

Debate. Inductive Reasoning When you start with a probable truth, and seek evidence to support it. Most scientific theories are inductive. Evidence is.

Is there such a thing as conscious will?. What is “conscious will”?! Having “free will” or “conscious will” basically means being in control of one’s.

Chapter 3 Section 5 - Slide 1 Copyright © 2009 Pearson Education, Inc. AND.

Debate. Inductive Reasoning When you start with a probable truth, and seek evidence to support it. Most scientific theories are inductive. Evidence is.

Organizing Your Legal Analysis

LOGIC CHAPTER 3 1. EULER DIAGRAMS: A PROBLEM-SOLVING TOOL

Basic Argumentation.

RESEARCH IN EDUCATION Chapter I. Explanations about the Universe Power of the gods Religious authority Challenge to religious dogma Metacognition: Thinking.

Deductive vs. Inductive Reasoning. Objectives Use a Venn diagram to determine the validity of an argument. Complete a pattern with the most likely possible.

2.5 Verifying Arguments Write arguments symbolically. Determine when arguments are valid or invalid. Recognize form of standard arguments. Recognize common.

Logic is the study of the principles of correct reasoning associated with the formation and analysis of arguments.

WELCOME! Course Expectations Respect  We will argue on a daily basis  Argue: Give reasons or provide evidence for an idea or theory, usually with the.

Warm Up 1. How do I know the following must be false? Points P, Q, and R are coplanar. They lie on plane m. They also lie on another plane, plane n. 2.

REASONING Deductive reasoning - syllogisms. Syllogisms are examples of gaining knowledge by reasoning. Can you discuss in your groups the benefits of.

Who Defined the Study of Philosophy and Logic? ________,___________,__________ These three philosophers form the basis of what is known as__________________.

Terms of Logic and Types of Argument AP English Language and Composition.

Logic in Everyday Life.

Question of the Day!  We shared a lot of examples of illogical arguments!  But how do you make a LOGICAL argument? What does your argument need? What.

Mike McGuire MV Community College COM 101 A Closer Look at Logos Syllogism, Enthymeme, and Logical Fallacies ENGL102 Ordover Fall 2008.

Unit 1 – Foundations of Logic Reasoning and Arguments.

REASONING AS PROBLEM SOLVING DEDUCTIVE REASONING: –what, if any, conclusions necessarily follow? INDUCTIVE REASONING: –what is the probability that those.

2.8 Methods of Proof PHIL 012 1/26/2001.

DEDUCTIVE VS. INDUCTIVE REASONING. Problem Solving Logic – The science of correct reasoning. Reasoning – The drawing of inferences or conclusions from.

DEDUCTIVE VS. INDUCTIVE REASONING Section 1.1. PROBLEM SOLVING Logic – The science of correct reasoning. Reasoning – The drawing of inferences or conclusions.

The construction of a formal argument

PHIL 2525 Contemporary Moral Issues Lec 2 Arguments are among us…

Deductive and induction reasoning

Logic and Reasoning.

Understanding the Persuasive Techniques in Developing Arguments How a speech can soothe and inspire a grieving population.

09/17/07 BR- What is “logic?” What does it mean to make a logical argument? Today: Logic and How to Argue (Part 1)

Deductive Reasoning. Deductive reasoning The process of logical reasoning from general principles to specific instances based on the assumed truth of.

Deductive and Inductive Reasoning

 Induction is the process of drawing a general conclusion from incomplete evidence.  You consider evidence you have seen or heard to draw a conclusion.

Deductive s. Inductive Reasoning

I think therefore I am - Rene Descartes. REASON (logic) It has been said that man is a rational animal. All my life I have been searching for evidence.

Do now Can you make sure that you have finished your Venn diagrams from last lesson. Can you name 5 famous mathematicians (including one that is still.

Introduction to Philosophy Doing Philosophy: Arguments

Weapon of Legal Instruction

DEDUCTIVE vs. INDUCTIVE REASONING

DEDUCTIVE vs. INDUCTIVE REASONING

Deductive reasoning.

3 Types of Arguments: Ethos- Establishing a reason to listen or believe the speaker. E.g., “that guy is wearing a tie so he must know what he’s saying.”

Deductive and Inductive REASONING

Argumentation and Persuasion

Win Every Argument Every Time

Syllogism, Enthymeme, and Logical Fallacies

Evaluating truth tables

Sec. 2.3: Apply Deductive Reasoning

MAT 142 Lecture Video Series

Validity and Soundness

DEDUCTIVE vs. INDUCTIVE REASONING

DEDUCTIVE vs. INDUCTIVE REASONING

DEDUCTIVE REASONING Forensic Science.

3.5 Symbolic Arguments.

DEDUCTIVE vs. INDUCTIVE REASONING Section 1.1. Problem Solving Logic – The science of correct reasoning. Reasoning – The drawing of inferences or conclusions.

DEDUCTIVE vs. INDUCTIVE REASONING

6.4 Truth Tables for Arguments

“Kritikos” To question, to make sense of, to analyze.

Logical Fallacies.

Phil2303 intro to logic.

If there is any case in which true premises lead to a false conclusion, the argument is invalid. Therefore this argument is INVALID.

DEDUCTIVE vs. INDUCTIVE REASONING

3.5 Symbolic Arguments.

If there is any case in which true premises lead to a false conclusion, the argument is invalid. Therefore this argument is INVALID.

Presentation transcript:

1 How to learn and How to teach the Law Studying Law Teaching Law Teaching is Learning Conclusion KAGAYAMA Shigeru Professor emeritus of Nagoya University 2016/2/16How to learn and teach the Law

2 Table of contents Studying Law The purpose of Studying Law Methods for mastering Law IRAC (The way of Legal Thinking) Toulmin diagram (The Structure of Argument) Teaching Law (Teaching is Learning) Teaching Law Teaching Plan Reducing by half One half for lecture, another for students’ presentation Conclusion 2016/2/16 How to learn and teach the Law

Studying Law The purpose of Study To solve difficult problems peacefully To master legal way of thinking through solving cases How to achieve the purpose of study To master IRAC: The way of Legal thinking To plan the layout of Argument: From Syllogistic to Toulmin Diagram 32016/2/16 How to learn and teach the Law

IRAC: The way of legal thinking I: Issue Find legal issues among facts. R: Rules Find applicable rules to facts. A 1 : Application Apply rules to facts and deduct tentative conclusions. A 2 : Argument (Most Important) Argue with tentative conclusion pro and con. C: Conclusion Draw final conclusion after rigorous argument /2/16 How to learn and teach the Law

Probably yes From Syllogistic to Toulmin Diagram Syllogism (No exceptions are admitted) Major premise: All men are mortal. Miner premise: Socrates is a man. Conclusion: Socrates is mortal. Socrates is a man.Socrates is mortal. All men are mortal. All living things are mortal. Socrates is a man of god of philosophy. Toulmin Diagram (Exceptions are admitted) However, god and truth are immortal. 2016/2/16 How to learn and teach the Law 5

Probably yes Application of Toulmin Diagram to Joke The person who made a manifestation knows that it does not reflect his/her true intention. The manifestation is valid. The person who made a manifestation is liable to it. The manifestation of intention which is concealed the true intention: It is invalid in case the other party knew or could have known. It is valid in case the other party is didn’t know and without negligence. When the other party knew or could have known the true intention, the manifestation is invalid. 2016/2/16 How to learn and teach the Law 6

Teaching Law Teaching Method Work out your Teaching Plan. Reduce that plan by half. On half for lecture and another half for practice. (ex. Students’ Presentation) Teaching is Learning You have to study before teaching. Teaching is equal with learning and reporting before an audience /2/16 How to learn and teach the Law

Conclusion Don’t teach too much. Let students practice and teach. Then they will learn by themselves. Teach basic idea through solving one of the most difficult problems. When student can solve such a difficult matter, she/he mastered basic ideas naturally. Try to become the most excellent teacher. Imitate a method of the excellent teacher first. Then, create new methods from your experiences /2/16 How to learn and teach the Law

The end of Presentation Question(Chinese) : Is this case a joint tort? Three drivers act separately, so are there no joint torts? Answer: There is the same damages. Negligent act of each driver causes the same damages, so in this case there is a joint tort. 2016/2/16 How to learn and teach the Law 9 Presentation of Vietnam team August 18, 2012