Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Abstract This paper investigates the basis arguments of so-called legal logic and their relation to logic in its standard meaning. There is no doubt that legal arguments belong to logic in the wide sense ( sensu largo ), but their reduction to schemes of formal logic ( logica sensu stricto ) is a controversial issue. It can be demonstrated that only some legal arguments fall under explicit rules of formal logic, that is, having a deductive character. Most such reasoning is fallible, and its correctness depends on appealing to extra-logical principles taken from legal norms. For instance, if we say, “If it is permitted more, then it is permitted less” ( argumentum a maiori ad minus ), we assume that the concepts expressed by the words “more” and “less” are already defined.
Jan Woleński (Sun,) studied this question.