Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T08:12:50.101Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Rethinking Legal Reasoning by Geoffrey Samuel. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 2018, 416pp (£95.00 hardback). ISBN 978-1-78471-260-0

Review products

Rethinking Legal Reasoning by Geoffrey Samuel. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 2018, 416pp (£95.00 hardback). ISBN 978-1-78471-260-0

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 January 2020

Luca Siliquini-Cinelli Open the ORCID record for Luca Siliquini-Cinelli [Opens in a new window]
Luca Siliquini-Cinelli*
Affiliation:
University of Dundee, Dundee, UK
*
*Email: l.siliquinicinelli@dundee.ac.uk
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Book Review
Information
Legal Studies , Volume 40 , Issue 2 , June 2020 , pp. 348 - 351
Copyright
Copyright © The Society of Legal Scholars 2020

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Samuel, GRethinking Legal Reasoning (Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 2018) p ixCrossRefGoogle Scholar.

2 Samuel, above n 1, p 2.

3 Ibid, p 2.

4 Ibid, pp 7, 115, 331.

5 Ibid, p 4.

6 Ibid, p 4.

7 Samuel, G ‘Comparative law and the legal mind’ in Birks, P and Pretto, A (eds) Themes in Comparative Law: Essays In Honour of Bernard Rudden (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002) pp 35–47Google Scholar.

8 Samuel, above n 1, p 9: ‘A diachronic approach has … much to offer. But so does a synchronic approach if one is prepared to look beyond the legal literature’.

9 Ibid, p 8.

10 Ibid.

11 Ibid.

12 Ibid.

13 Ibid, pp 12–13.

14 Ibid, pp 15, 331.

15 Ibid, pp 41–42.

16 Ibid, pp 67–70.

17 Ibid, pp 168–196.

18 Ibid, pp 258–284.

19 See in particular Samuel's statement at p 190: ‘Legal reasoning is about manipulating facts (accomodatio factorum) to make them conform in an isomorphic way with a conceptual structure implied by a legal text (statute, contract, or will) or by a precedent or line of precedents’. Samuel further explores this ‘epistemological attitude’ in chapter 9.

20 Samuel, above n 1, p 141.

21 Ibid, p 47; Samuel, GEpistemology and Method in Law (London: Routledge [2003] 2006)Google Scholar.

22 See also Samuel, G ‘Have there been scientific revolutions in law?’ (2017) 11(1) Journal of Comparative Law 186Google Scholar.

23 Ashley, KDArtificial Intelligence and Legal Analytics: New Tools for Law Practice in the Digital Age (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

24 Samuel, above n 1, pp 8, 51–52, 166–167, 255, 272.

25 Ibid, p 160.

26 Ibid, p 285.

27 Ibid, p 285.

28 Ibid, p 87.

29 Ibid, p 88.

30 Ibid, p 87.

31 Ibid.

32 Ibid, p 107.

33 Ibid, pp 292, 306, 327.

34 Ibid, p 303.

35 Burazin, L et al. Law as an Artifact (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

36 Samuel, above n 1, p 1.