ABSTRACT
The thesis that will be advanced in this book, in summary, is this. It will be argued that the assumption that knowledge of law consists of knowledge of rules – that is to say, normative propositions capable of being expressed in symbolic language (natural and mathematical language) – is inadequate. Such a rule-model epistemological thesis fails, it will be argued, to take account of fact construction in legal thought. In pursuing this thesis, however, the book will embrace wider issues than fact construction: it will look at legal reasoning and legal method more generally.
