Master in Global Rule of Law and Constitutional Democracy

2015/16
Philosophy of Evidence
Giovanni Damele
2nd Unit Questionnaire
1) Explain the following quotations from Chapt. 10 of Rethinking Evidence by W. Twining:
a) ...why should there be any difference in the persuasiveness or the cogency of an
argument by presenting it in the form of a statement of the facts of the particular case
rather than explicitly as a formulation of a general fact-pattern or as a rule?
b) ...the claim that the statement of facts is the heart in arguments about questions of law
is an example of an exaggerated statement that contains an important core of truth.
2) Explain why, according to Twining, while a sound theory of reasoning about disputed
questions of fact needs to take account of narrative coherence and other holistic ideas, it is
a mistake to treat atomism and holism as rival or incompatible approaches.
3) Summarize Chapt. 11 of Rethinking Evidence by W. Twining, in no more than 500 words.