What’s in a Game? Legal
                    Positivism as ‘Still Descriptive and
                    Morally Neutral’

Kwak, Arie-Jan Mr. Dr.

doi:10.5553/rem/.000025

Law and Method

2017

DOI: 10.5553/rem/.000025

|View full text |Cite

What’s in a Game? Legal Positivism as ‘Still Descriptive and Morally Neutral’

Arie-Jan Mr. Dr. Kwak¹

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...

Citation Types

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Year Published

2022

Publication Types

Select...

Article1

Relationship

Self Cite0

Independent1

Authors

Journals

Cited by 1 publication

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

Game analogy in law reconsidered: is evidence at stake?

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this paper is to show that the meaning and significance of legal evidence is being constituted throughout the course of a singular instance of legal proceedings. This is to be achieved by describing what legal agents do while appealing to different propositions of fact and inferring from them throughout the course of legal proceedings. The authors claim that the process of applying the law is ultimately rooted in the inferential discursive practices of exchanging reasons on the part of the participants of legal proceedings. Therefore, they set forth a model of legal proceedings that consists of an interplay between three types of reasons, which are exchanged by the participants of legal proceedings: i.e. legal reasons, epistemic reasons and stake reasons. To illustrate this interplay, the authors deploy a metaphor of law as a game, and provide a description of legal proceedings as a particular instance of playing a game of law. The conclusion is that the legal concept of evidence is (at least in part) constituted by the role that evidence plays in affecting which reasons for action the participants to legal proceedings choose to act on. The other final assumption of this paper is metatheoretical: authors want to show that when analyzing what legal evidence is, one should begin from the perspective of a singular instance of legal proceedings, rather than from the perspective of law in general.

show abstract

Game analogy in law reconsidered: is evidence at stake?

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.

Contact Info

customersupport@researchsolutions.com

10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614

Henderson, NV 89052, USA

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Blog Terms and Conditions API Terms Privacy Policy Contact Cookie Preferences Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information

Made with 💙 for researchers

Part of the Research Solutions Family.

What’s in a Game? Legal Positivism as ‘Still Descriptive and Morally Neutral’

Cited by 1 publication

References 3 publications

Game analogy in law reconsidered: is evidence at stake?

Game analogy in law reconsidered: is evidence at stake?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About