What Have Introductory Books on Legal Reasoning Ever Done for Us?

The purpose of this article is to investigate, and to review, a number of recent introductions to law with the emphasis being on those introducing students to legal reasoning. The investigation will have as its focus not just reasoning methodology but equally the ontological and epistemological foundations upon which the reasoning is based. The investigation will be comparative in its orientation; it will examine, in particular, works from common lawyers and French jurists, with references also to books produced by Roman law specialists (Romanists). It will show that many introductions are based on an ontological foundation that emphasizes rules—the rule model—and that, with regard to some of the introductory books, this emphasis has engendered what is arguably a simplistic view of legal knowledge and method. Are such books, it might be asked, epistemologically reliable? To help answer this question, another comparative orientation to be undertaken is to examine some introductory works in the social sciences in order to see not only how these works may differ in their approach to knowledge and methodology but also how methodological discussions in the social sciences could be valuable for lawyers. Keywords: analogy; epistemology; introductions; logic; ontology; perception; rule model; syllogism.