Today, the rational of the world is at risk.

Too many people are taken advantage of because of their lack

of critical thinking, logic and deductive reasoning. Why do we need to learn logic? Does logic play an
important role in the rule of law? What is the relevance of philosophy to law?

Logic is the study of the principles and methods of good reasoning. It is a science of reasoning which
aims to determine and lay down the criteria of good reasoning and bad reasoning.

The relationship between logic and law has become an object of much philosophical debate in the last
century. Several scholars have denied the usefulness of logical methods in law and legal theory while
others have strongly argued in favor of a logic-driven analysis of law and legal reasoning. Others would
say, “What?!! Law is all about words not logic or any mathematical equations. In the book entitled
“Logic and Law: A Concise Overview” it provides us around four sections each addressing , in a concise
way , a particular aspect of legal theory which has been object of analysis by logical methods in the form
of algebraic equations and formulas.

In the book “The Relevance of Philosophy to Law” it was stated that one student may wonder why
someone interested in learning law needs to study the relevance of philosophy to law. One may argue
that law, possessed of a unique perspective, is a self-contained that is best left on its own, free from the
intrusions and encroachments of a discipline with a different perspective, like philosophy and logic.
Furthermore, he may cap the argument by pointing out that philosophers, not being lawyers, are bound
to misunderstand the law. When philosophical ideas or logic intrude the realm of law, it is not for the
purpose of complicating matters, but on the contrary, for the purpose of clarifying them.

In addition to that, in the book “ Logic in the law” written by Edwin W. Patterson he stated that the
relation of philosophy to the law is both dynamic and genetic .Philosophy, as a comprehensive body of
theory about the most pervasive and basic questions of the universe embraces the most basic and
pervasive questions of law.

Moreover, Patterson stated that philosophy as a cultural tradition may have had its social
consequences, including its consequences to the law. In addition he stated, that since lawyers and
judges are continually engaged in trying to attain dependable conclusions with respect to problematic
situations, it seems obvious that logic in this sense is essentially involved in the practical work of law;
and since consequence of this practical work, the law , as a set of authoritative norms of conduct, is the
consequence of a logical process. I agree with what he stated, by understanding philosophy and logic it
helps the lawyers to defend and justify their assertions and statements and help the courts to assess the
strength of evidences and make rational and sound decisions.
Nicholas Lucas, the author of the book “Logic and Law”, stated that there is no doubt an intimate
relation between logic and law exists. He defined logic as the science of the principles and
conditions of correct thinking. The influence of logic upon law arises from one fundamental fact,
that laws are not self-applicable ---and a rule of law isolated from a world of fact is no more than a
speculative ghost. I agreed in what he said, logic has a big influence to the rule of law and a big help
in the administration of justice. A specific knowledge of the canons of reasoning enables one to
discover more readily where the fallacy of a misleading argument lies.

In an essay entitled “The Bad Man and a Good lawyer” it was emphasized there that when we study
law, we are not studying a mystery but a well known profession. One may wonder what does the
author means. I agree that the law is a well known profession but I disagree that it is not a mystery.
For me studying law is full of mysteries. As a law student, I am still confused on how to determine
what is right from what is wrong. Recently, my mind is clouded of mysteries on how the court
decided the case of Chief Justice Sereno. Was the court correct or not? I guess that is when logic
comes to the picture.

Furthermore, in the Harry Jones/Roscoe Pound test for “good opinion”: “How thoughtfully and
disinterestedly the Court weighed the conflicting social interests involved in the case and how fair
and durable its adjustment of interest-conflicts promised to be. One cannot advocate or pronounce
a position that is ‘fair and durable” unless formal rules of logic go into the process. Whether it is
right nor wrong to the eyes of the people, it is still the Law. Dura sed Lex. It is by means of logic that
we clarify our ideas , assess the acceptability of the claims and beliefs we encounter, defend and
justify our assertions, and statements and make rational and sound decisions.

To sum it up, through philosophy and logic as I understand, we acquire a means of assessing and
upgrading our ability to judge well. It enables us to go into virtually any situation and to figure out
the logic of whatever is happening in that situation. It provides a way for us to learn from new
experiences through the process of continual self-assessment. It then enables us to form sound
beliefs and judgments and in doing so provides us with a basis for a rational and reasonable
emotional life. Without logical reasoning, chaos could occur.