LECTURE ON LAW AND LOGIC

FOR B.A., LL.B. (HONS.), 2017-18

PRESENTED BY:
THANGZAKHUP TOMBING
ASSISTANT PROFESSOR OF LAW
NLU, ASSAM
29/08/2017
LAW AND LOGIC
 To understand the relation of law and
justice.
 The path of the law, the language of
judicial decision is mainly a language of
logic. – Holmes
 “...the life of the law has not been logic; it
has been experienced”- Holmes
 Experience- the felt necessities of the
time; the prevalent moral and political
theories; institution public policies etc...
COMPONENTS OF LOGIC

Logic

Informal Formal

Inverse
Deductive Inductive Analogy Fortori
Deductive
LOGIC
 Logic is the study of reasoning.
 Derived from the Greek word “logos”
which has a variety of meaning including
word, thought, idea, argument, account,
reason or principle.
 Logic is the study of reasoning, or the
study of the principles and criteria of valid
inference and demonstration.
 It attempts to distinguish good reasoning
from bad reasoning.
INFORMAL LOGIC
 It studies natural language(general- purpose
of communication) arguments, and attempt
to develop a logic to asses, analyse and
improve ordinary language or everyday
reasoning. (e.g. I am not sleeping, because I
am awake!!)
 It focuses on the reasoning arguments one
finds in personal exchange, advertising,
political debate, legal argument, and social
commentary....newspaper, TV, social media,
mass media.
FORMAL LOGIC
 The traditional logic or philosophical logic
where expression (premise) include the
study of inference with purely formal and
explicit content.
 A formal system is used to derive
expression (conclusion) from one or
more expressions (premises).
 Developed by Aristotle- syllogism.
Deductive Method
 It is a process of reasoning from the general to
particular or from the universe to individual.
 It starts with general statements and concludes in
a specific statement.
All men are mortal;
Ajad is a man;
Therefore, Ajad is mortal.
• The first proposition is the Major Premise, the
second the Minor premise, the third proposition,
because it follows from the Major and the Minor
premise, is the Conclusion.
Deductive Method
Ilustration:
COMPLAINT
I. Major Premise: Whoever enters into or upon
property in the possession of another with
intent to commit an offence, is said to commit
“criminal trespass”.
II. Minor Premise and Complaint: The defendant
did upon a certain day and at a certain place,
forcibly and against the will of the owner, enter
upon the plaintiff’s land, etc…
III. Conclusion: Therefore, the plaintiff was injured
and damaged in the sum of Rs. X
Deductive Method
DEFENSE- I
(Facts as alleged do not come under general rule
of law)
I. Major Premise: Any set of facts which does
not come within the general rule of law
governing such facts is not actionable.
II. Minor Premise: This set of facts does not
come within the rule of law.
III. Conclusion: Therefore, this set of facts is
not actionable.
Deductive Method
DEFENSE- II
(Facts as alleged do come under general rule of
law, but the alleged facts are not true…)
I. Major premise: alleged facts are not true
constitute no cause of action.
II. Minor Premise: The defendant denies
each and every allegation in the
plaintiff’s complaint.
III. Conclusion: Therefore, there is no cause
of action.
Inductive Method
 Inductive reasoning starts from a particular
case to whole group.
 It is a process of reasoning from observable
facts to generalization, there is a sense of
posteriori, historical or experience.
e.g.
1. Crow in Delhi is black in colour.
2. Crow in Guwahati is black in colour and so
on…
3. All Crows are black in colour.
Inductive Method
Steps in Inductive Method:
# The menace of rape cases in India
I Statement of Problem
II Observation
III Hypothesis
IV Data Collection
V Content Analysis
VI Conclusion/ Theory