The Study Of Argument Method In Reasoning With Evidential

Due to the irreversibility of time,it is impossible to observe directly the occurrence of the objective facts of a case in practice,and people can only rationally restore the facts of the past by collecting and organizing various kinds of evidence materials after the occurrence of a case,the above process of reducing facts through evidence is the process of evidence reasoning.At present,there are three main evidence reasoning methods in academic circles: argumentation method,story method and probability method.No matter what method,its aim is to construct the factual circumstances of the case,make the evidence material correspond to the case,and finally complete the proof.The above three evidential reasoning methods respectively display their respective advantages in showing the overall overview of the case,quantifying the reasoning intensity,etc.,therefore,in the judicial practice,it is very important for the analyst to choose which method of evidence reasoning.In the method of argumentation,the construction of the facts of a case is completed by the analyst through a series of successive reasoning steps,beginning with a certain evidence or general knowledge and ending with a certain final item to be proved.In the process of argumentation,each step of reasoning includes a statement of generality,which not only connects the premise and conclusion,but also exposes all the doubtful points in the reasoning process.By attacking the above-mentioned doubtful points,the analyst can improve the whole process of argumentation,which shows the invalidity of argumentation in the legal context.The research value of the argumentation method is mainly reflected in the following points: first,when faced with a large amount of evidence in a complex case,the argumentation method can visually show the connection between the evidence and the conclusion,methods of argument are especially important when one is in doubt about the reasoning of a particular piece of evidence,the method of argumentation,as a practical tool,can help the analyst verify his own argumentation strength and find out the weakness of the other side,which is beneficial to both the plaintiff and the defendant in the case to make the lawsuit strategy,the method of argumentation has a certain degree of formalization and computability,which can provide theoretical support for the modeling of formal argumentation in the field of legal artificial intelligence,anyone who wants to practice law in the future can improve his or her evidential reasoning skills and broaden his or her critical perspective by learning the methods of argument.In our country,most of the researches on the evidence field are confined to the research on the evidence rule itself,but there is not much discussion on the inference from evidence to fact.Therefore,this article will take the demonstration method in the evidence reasoning as the theme,summarize the characteristics of the demonstration method and the latest theory,and explore a set of more reasonable different demonstration evaluation standards on the basis of the above theory,finally,the evidence reasoning is carried out with the concrete case.In this way,the author hopes to arouse the legal workers’ attention to the evidential reasoning based on the argumentation method,and help the fact-finders to determine the best argumentation when they face different argumentation in constructing the case facts.This article will cover the following topics:The first chapter analyzes the theoretical basis of the three main methods of evidential reasoning,namely,the method of argument,the method of story and the method of probability,this paper summarizes the characteristics of various evidential reasoning methods from a critical perspective.Although the topic of this paper is the reasoning method of evidence,in order to better understand the advantages and disadvantages of the reasoning method,it is necessary to compare it with the other two reasoning methods.At the same time,the clarification of the basic theories of various evidential reasoning methods at the beginning of the paper is helpful to the understanding of some of the points raised later.The second chapter is the research path analysis of argumentation method,focusing on the analysis of “Wigmore chart method”,“New evidence theorist analysis method”and “Legal artificial intelligence formal argumentation”,summarize the development process of different argumentation theories as well as their advantages and disadvantages.The main purpose of this chapter is to introduce the concrete steps and purposes of different argumentation theories in the construction of facts by analyzing the current mainstream argumentation theories in detail.On the one hand,by introducing the argumentation steps of each argumentation theory,the analyst can complete the leap from theory to practice.On the other hand,only by mastering the argumentation process skillfully can we make reasonable evaluation criteria in the following argumentation evaluation process so as to select the best argumentation among them.The third chapter is the innovation part of this article.First of all,this chapter introduces the common reasoning basis of the three main evidence reasoning methods,“The best explanation inference”,clarifies its concept and its role in evidence reasoning.Secondly,combining the characteristics of the previous argumentation methods in evidential reasoning and the relevant factors affecting argumentation,the author starts from two dimensions: the internal structure of argumentation and the structure of argument,develop a reasonable set of criteria for evaluating different arguments and selecting the best one from them.Finally,the distinction between the best standard of proof and the standard of judicial proof.In judicial practice,even if the evidence reasoning reaches the best standard of proof,it does not mean that it reaches the standard of civil or criminal proof.Whether the conclusion drawn from the best argument can be regarded as the final fact should be tested by the specific standard of judicial proof.In the fourth chapter,the author applies the new evidence theorist to the case of Liu Xizhong’s intentional homicide,in order to test the feasibility of the argumentation method and the best evaluation standard of argumentation.First of all,according to the existing evidence material,according to the previous steps of the demonstration to complete the preliminary theoretical construction,drawing demonstration map and other work.Secondly,the thesis evaluates the arguments of the prosecution and the defense in the case according to the best evaluation standard of arguments drawn up in chapter three.Finally,according to the result of the evaluation,the best argumentation in the case is determined and compared with the result of the judgment in reality to test its feasibility.