Question

Which statement accurately describes the evaluation of legal arguments?

The factors that bear on the evaluation of ordinary analogical arguments are irrelevant to the evaluation of legal arguments.
The factors that bear on the evaluation of ordinary analogical arguments can often be used to evaluate a legal argument.
Similarities between the case at trial and cases of legal precedent are rarely debatable.
Legal arguments in cases of first impression are easiest to evaluate because they involve fewer precedents.
A. 1.
B. 2.
C. 3.
D. 4.

Answer 1

The factors that affect the evaluation of ordinary analogical arguments also apply to legal arguments, thereby making statement B accurate in describing how legal arguments are evaluated in relation to logic and precedents.

Step-by-step explanation:

Which statement accurately describes the evaluation of legal arguments? The correct answer is B: The factors that bear on the evaluation of ordinary analogical arguments can often be used to evaluate a legal argument.

Legal arguments frequently rely on analogical reasoning, which involves drawing conclusions based on similarities between current and past cases (stare decisis). Lawyers often present legal arguments that require the trier of fact to evaluate the logic and truth of the premises and determine if they support the conclusion. This process is analogous to the evaluation of any reasoned argument.

While legal arguments are specific to the legal realm and must adhere to certain formal requirements and precedents, the underlying structure of these arguments is similar to ordinary analogical arguments. Therefore, the logical analysis used in ordinary reasoning often applies to legal reasoning as well.