1. FIRST CYCLE - BACHELOR'S DEGREE
  2. FACULTY OF LAW
  3. LAW DEPARTMENT
  4. 407 LAW
Course Information Course Learning Outcomes Course's Contribution To Program ECTS Workload Course Details
Print

COURSE INFORMATION
Course CodeCourse TitleL+P HourSemesterECTS
HUK 120LEGAL ARGÜMANTATION AND FORENSIC RETORICS2 + 01st Semester4

COURSE DESCRIPTION
Course Level Bachelor's Degree
Course Type Elective
Course Objective It is aimed to increase the ability of reasoning by improving the ability of the student to think correctly and properly. No matter which part of the legal structure it represents, it is intended to recognize valid and sound reasoning and to provide the necessary equipment for defending, claiming or making judgments. However, it is the second center of gravity of the course to introduce possible rhetoric traps, misconceptions and fallacy types that the parties may apply in the judicial process. Thus, it is aimed to distinguish the negative persuasion elements, which are often difficult to identify, which are hidden in the communication process for the correct provision.
Course Content analytical logic and reasoning will be discussed. Then, a theory of argumentation, which is developed by considering the field of law and which is evaluated within the framework of informal logic, will be included. This theory which is frequently used in the field of legal education is the argumentation model of Stephen Toulmin. This first part of the course is the part of convincing communication that involves the construction of arguments. In the other half, there is a negative dimension of persuasive communication through forensic rhetoric. In this context, misleading misunderstandings, rhetoric traps and fallacy types will be included.
Prerequisites No the prerequisite of lesson.
Corequisite No the corequisite of lesson.
Mode of Delivery Face to Face

COURSE LEARNING OUTCOMES
1 to be able to examine the types of analytic logic and reasoning
2 To be able to examine the argumentation model of Stephen Toulmin
3 To be able to discuss the misunderstandings, rhetoric traps and fallacy types for deception / deceit

COURSE'S CONTRIBUTION TO PROGRAM
PO 01PO 02PO 03PO 04PO 05PO 06PO 07PO 08PO 09PO 10PO 11PO 12PO 13PO 14PO 15PO 16PO 17PO 18PO 19PO 20
LO 001                    
LO 002                    
LO 003                    
Sub Total                    
Contribution00000000000000000000

ECTS ALLOCATED BASED ON STUDENT WORKLOAD BY THE COURSE DESCRIPTION
ActivitiesQuantityDuration (Hour)Total Work Load (Hour)
Course Duration (14 weeks/theoric+practical)14228
Hours for off-the-classroom study (Pre-study, practice)11222
Mid-terms12020
Final examination13434
Total Work Load

ECTS Credit of the Course





104

4
COURSE DETAILS
 Select Year   


 Course TermNoInstructors
Details 2023-2024 Spring1OSMAN ÇALIŞKAN
Details 2022-2023 Spring1OSMAN ÇALIŞKAN
Details 2021-2022 Spring1OSMAN ÇALIŞKAN
Details 2019-2020 Spring1OSMAN ÇALIŞKAN


Print

Course Details
Course Code Course Title L+P Hour Course Code Language Of Instruction Course Semester
HUK 120 LEGAL ARGÜMANTATION AND FORENSIC RETORICS 2 + 0 1 Turkish 2023-2024 Spring
Course Coordinator  E-Mail  Phone Number  Course Location Attendance
Assoc. Prof. Dr. OSMAN ÇALIŞKAN osmancaliskan@pau.edu.tr İİBF C0103 %70
Goals It is aimed to increase the ability of reasoning by improving the ability of the student to think correctly and properly. No matter which part of the legal structure it represents, it is intended to recognize valid and sound reasoning and to provide the necessary equipment for defending, claiming or making judgments. However, it is the second center of gravity of the course to introduce possible rhetoric traps, misconceptions and fallacy types that the parties may apply in the judicial process. Thus, it is aimed to distinguish the negative persuasion elements, which are often difficult to identify, which are hidden in the communication process for the correct provision.
Content analytical logic and reasoning will be discussed. Then, a theory of argumentation, which is developed by considering the field of law and which is evaluated within the framework of informal logic, will be included. This theory which is frequently used in the field of legal education is the argumentation model of Stephen Toulmin. This first part of the course is the part of convincing communication that involves the construction of arguments. In the other half, there is a negative dimension of persuasive communication through forensic rhetoric. In this context, misleading misunderstandings, rhetoric traps and fallacy types will be included.
Topics
WeeksTopics
1 Academic Framework of Rhetoric and Argumentation and Its Relationship with Law
2 Reasoning and Terms of It
3 Rhetoric and Judicial Rhetoric
4 Fallacies
5 Sophistical Refutations
6 Eristic Dialectic
7 Midterm Exam
8 Toulmin's Model of Argumentation
9 Toulmin's Model of Argumentation (2)
10 The New Rhetoric of Chaim Perelman
11 Jürgen Habermas's Theory of Communicative Rationality
12 Justification of Judgments
13 Analysis and Evaluation of Reasons
14 Final Exam
Materials
FileFile NameFile LanguageOriginal File NameAdded Date
Download File SEÇMEN TERCİHLERİNİN YÖNLENDİRİLMESİNDE ARGÜMANTASYON FAKTÖRÜ - Kopya.pdfTürkçeSEÇMEN TERCİHLERİNİN YÖNLENDİRİLMESİNDE ARGÜMANTASYON FAKTÖRÜ - Kopya.pdf21.02.2024 12:37:55
Download File SEÇMEN TERCİHLERİNİN YÖNLENDİRİLMESİNDE ARGÜMANTASYON FAKTÖRÜ - Kopya.pdfTürkçeSEÇMEN TERCİHLERİNİN YÖNLENDİRİLMESİNDE ARGÜMANTASYON FAKTÖRÜ - Kopya.pdf21.02.2024 12:37:55
Download File HUKUKTA AD HOMINEM MANTIK HATASITürkçeHUKUKTA AD HOMINEM MANTIK HATASI.pdf21.02.2024 12:37:55
Download File SEÇMEN TERCİHLERİNİN YÖNLENDİRİLMESİNDE ARGÜMANTASYON FAKTÖRÜ - Kopya.pdfTürkçeSEÇMEN TERCİHLERİNİN YÖNLENDİRİLMESİNDE ARGÜMANTASYON FAKTÖRÜ - Kopya.pdf21.02.2024 12:38:06
Download File SEÇMEN TERCİHLERİNİN YÖNLENDİRİLMESİNDE ARGÜMANTASYON FAKTÖRÜ - Kopya.pdfTürkçeSEÇMEN TERCİHLERİNİN YÖNLENDİRİLMESİNDE ARGÜMANTASYON FAKTÖRÜ - Kopya.pdf21.02.2024 12:38:06
Download File HUKUKTA AD HOMINEM MANTIK HATASITürkçeHUKUKTA AD HOMINEM MANTIK HATASI.pdf21.02.2024 12:38:06
Resources
ResourcesResources Language
Toulmin, S., Rieke, R., & Janik, A. (1984). An Introduction to Reasoning. New York: Macmillan Publishing.English
van Eemeren, F., Garssen, B., Krabbe, E., Henkemans, A., Verheij, B., & Wagemans, J. (2014). Handbook of Argumentation Theory. New York: Springer Reference. English
Çalışkan, O., (2018). Seçmen Tercihlerinin Yönlendirilmesinde Argümantasyon Faktörü: Cumhurbaşkanlığı Hükümet Sistemi Referandumu Kapsamındaki Tartışmalara Dair Örnek Bir Politik Argümantasyon Analizi: Marmara Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Yayımlanmamış Doktora Tezi.Türkçe
Bowell, T., & Kemp, G. (2018). Eleştirel Düşünme Klavuzu. (B. Tanrıseven, Çev.) Ankara: Tübitak Yayınları.Türkçe
Feteris, Eveline T. (2019). Hukuki Argümantasyonun Temelleri (Çev: Ertuğrul Uzun), İstanbul: Pinhan Yayıncılık.Türkçe
Course Assessment
Assesment MethodsPercentage (%)Assesment Methods Title
Final Exam60Final Exam
Midterm Exam40Midterm Exam
L+P: Lecture and Practice
PQ: Program Learning Outcomes
LO: Course Learning Outcomes