Thinking as human in legal reasoning: counterfactual thinking, intuition, and human reasoning in the digital age

This article examines the workings of human thinking in the digital age and its implications for legal reasoning. Contemporary epistemic conditions, characterized by uncertainty, complexity, and the mediatization of reality, challenge the traditional conception of reasoning as purely rational and stable. The urgency of this study lies in the growing reliance on simplified reasoning models within legal systems, despite increasing cognitive and technological complexity. Using a qualitative method based on a literature review, this study integrates perspectives from philosophy, legal theory, and cognitive science. The findings demonstrate that human thinking is adaptive, nonlinear, and shaped by perception, beliefs, and consciousness, which fundamentally distinguishes it from artificial intelligence. In legal reasoning, counterfactual thinking, intuition, and analytical reasoning interact as complementary processes, each with its own strengths and limitations. The study concludes that legal reasoning should be understood as a human-centered, reflective, and revisable practice capable of responding to the challenges of the digital age.