Call For Papers: Argumentation 2025--Games of Law, October 31-November 1, Faculty of Law, Masaryk University

Call for Papers:

Argumentation 2025 – Games of Law

October 31 – November 1

The Argumentation 2025 conference continues the project of creating space for alternative perspectives on law, fostering the emergence of critical jurisprudences that challenge legal orthodoxy. This year’s theme is Games of Law, an invitation to explore how legal practices can be viewed through the metaphor of games and the deeper implications this brings for understanding legal authority, fairness, and justice.

The metaphor of games has long been used to analyze social structures, with Johan Huizinga’s concept of homo ludens framing play as an essential aspect of human culture (Huizinga, 1980, 4). Law, too, can be seen as a form of structured play, where participants – judges, lawyers, litigants – operate within defined rules to achieve specific outcomes (Dybowski et al. 2022). Yet, just as in games, legal practices produce both winners and losers, with real-world consequences.

Moreover, law, as a system of structured conflict, reflects the inherent tensions and contradictions within human thinking and interaction. Legal practices, like games, are grounded in conflict – both internal and external – an unavoidable part of the human condition. Instead of attempting to eliminate conflict, legal systems strive to manage and transform it, utilizing discursive representations that foster resilience against its destructive forms. These mechanisms not only enable the resolution of disputes but also contribute to broader societal stability and justice.

This year’s conference will interrogate how law functions as a game and what this metaphor reveals about power, justice, and the nature of legal authority, while also exploring how the dynamics of conflict and resilience are embedded in legal thinking and practices. How can the game metaphor help us better understand law’s role in addressing societal tensions, managing conflicts, and strengthening communal resilience?

We invite papers that explore the following themes:

•           Language Games and Legal Practices

Drawing on Wittgenstein’s notion of language games, we explore how legal argumentation functions as a rule-bound process of strategic communication. Legal actors engage in performative acts, constructing meaning and positioning themselves within a framework of rules, much like players in a game. J.L. Austin’s theory of speech acts offers additional insight into how legal language not only describes but also performs actions—such as making promises, issuing judgments, or passing laws—producing real-world consequences through speech itself. Legal argumentation, however, is not merely about following rules or achieving outcomes; it also involves navigating conflicts that arise within legal discourse. These conflicts, inherent to human interaction, are shaped by competing interpretations and the strategic use of language to assert authority, resolve disputes, or challenge established norms. How can legal language help transform these conflicts into opportunities for resilience and justice? We welcome papers that explore how the concept of legal performativity intersects with the metaphor of law as a language game, examining how legal actors use speech to “move” through legal reasoning, define rules, and ultimately shape reality through their actions. Contributions might also consider how legal discourse manages conflict and contributes to societal resilience by framing, transforming, or resolving tensions within the legal field.

•           Legal Luck and the Game of Law

Just as games involve elements of unpredictability and chance, so too does law. The concept of legal luck – the unpredictable factors that can influence legal outcomes – raises critical questions about fairness and justice. Legal luck can manifest in various forms, such as the timing of a case, the assignment of a particular judge, or unforeseen procedural anomalies. These elements often fall outside the control of the participants yet can significantly impact the final decision, much like the roll of a dice in a game of chance. This theme invites contributors to examine how the element of luck shapes legal processes and outcomes, challenging the conventional view of law as a purely rational and objective system. How does the unpredictability inherent in legal systems affect our understanding of justice? Does the game metaphor help illuminate how chance plays a role in legal decision-making, or does it risk trivializing the real-life consequences of legal "losses"? We encourage papers that explore legal luck through the lenses of game theory, risk analysis, or critical theory debates about justice and fairness, and consider whether or not the concept of chance in law undermines or complements the legal system’s claims to impartiality and reason.

•           Critical Perspectives: Winners, Losers, and Power in the Game of Law

In both games and legal systems, there are clear winners and losers. However, unlike games, legal outcomes carry serious real-world consequences, often reflecting deeper societal inequalities. Legal rules and procedures, while appearing neutral, can privilege certain groups and disadvantage others, based on factors like socio-economic status, access to representation, or systemic biases. At the same time, legal systems are sites of conflict—inevitable struggles that stem from competing interests, values, and positions. Recognizing conflict as an inherent part of human experience, this theme invites exploration of how legal frameworks can transform destructive conflicts into opportunities for resilience and justice. We welcome papers that critically explore how the legal game reinforces power dynamics, producing outcomes that may not align with justice. How do existing legal structures favor certain “players,” and what are the ethical implications when legal success does not always mean moral rightness? Further, how can legal systems be designed to build resilience by managing conflicts more equitably? Contributions from critical legal studies, feminist, and postcolonial perspectives are encouraged, especially those that interrogate how the metaphor of games may mask inequalities and propose ways to make legal processes more just, resilient, and equitable for all participants.

•           Evidence as the Strategic Heart of the Legal Game

In the legal “game,” evidence is not simply factual material; it is a tool that legal actors use strategically. Lawyers, judges, and juries must navigate complex rules regarding the admissibility, relevance, and weight of evidence, with each party seeking to present or suppress information that strengthens their position. The rules governing evidence can sometimes be as decisive as the facts themselves. This theme invites papers exploring how the strategic use of evidence influences legal outcomes and whether the legal game metaphor helps us understand the dynamics of truth-finding. Additionally, evidence often serves as the focal point for conflicts within legal proceedings, reflecting deeper societal tensions and contradictions. How can legal systems manage these conflicts in ways that build resilience against their destructive potential? How do evidentiary rules and practices impact fairness and societal stability, and can they contribute to strengthening communal resilience while resolving disputes? We encourage contributions that critically analyze the role of evidence in adversarial legal systems and its implications for justice, impartiality, and the ethical conduct of legal proceedings, especially through the lens of conflict and resilience.

•           The Didactic Use of Games in Legal Education

Games are increasingly used in legal education to simulate the adversarial nature of legal practice, providing students with hands-on experience in navigating legal rules, strategies, and arguments. From visual activities to moot courts and role-playing exercises, these methods mirror real-life courtroom dynamics, allowing students to “play” the roles of lawyers, judges, or clients in a controlled environment. However, while these game-based learning approaches can effectively teach students the skills needed for practice, they also raise important questions. Beyond preparing students for legal competition, can such methods also cultivate resilience by helping students confront and manage the inherent conflicts of legal practice? How can educational games be designed to balance the adversarial nature of law with the need to develop a deeper understanding of justice, fairness, and conflict resolution? Does emphasizing resilience in legal training help future professionals navigate the moral and ethical dilemmas that arise in practice? Contributions might explore how game-based learning approaches address the conflicts embedded in legal education and practice, as well as how they equip students with tools to manage these challenges constructively.

With the Argumentation 2025 conference, we aim to bring together diverse perspectives from across law, philosophy, sociology, anthropology and related fields. We encourage contributions that interrogate the intersections between law and games, focusing on how legal authority, fairness, and justice are constructed and possibly contested through play-like processes.

We are pleased to announce our keynote speakers:

·       Peter Goodrich, Yeshiva University, New York

·       Thomas Giddens, University of Dundee

The Argumentation 2025 conference will take place in Brno, Czech Republic, and is hosted by the Faculty of Law, Masaryk University.

Abstracts of 300 words (max.) should be submitted to argumentation@law.muni.cz by July 31, 2025.

Conference participation fee is 150 EUR.

To learn more about Argumentation 2025, including registration, venue, and updates, please visit argumentation.law.muni.cz