You may have to Search all our reviewed books and magazines, click the sign up button below to create a free account.
The dominant approach to evaluating the law on evidence and proof focuses on how the trial system should be structured to guard against error. This book argues instead that complex and intertwining moral and epistemic considerations come into view when departing from the standpoint of a detached observer and taking the perspective of the person responsible for making findings of fact. Ho contends that it is only by exploring the nature and content of deliberative responsibility that the role and purpose of much of the law can be fully understood. In many cases, values other than truth have to be respected, not simply as side-constraints, but as values which are internal to the nature and pur...
A leading expert in informal logic, Douglas Walton turns his attention in this new book to how reasoning operates in trials and other legal contexts, with special emphasis on the law of evidence. The new model he develops, drawing on methods of argumentation theory that are gaining wide acceptance in computing fields like artificial intelligence, can be used to identify, analyze, and evaluate specific types of legal argument. In contrast with approaches that rely on deductive and inductive logic and rule out many common types of argument as fallacious, Walton&’s aim is to provide a more expansive view of what can be considered &"reasonable&" in legal argument when it is construed as a dynamic, rule-governed, and goal-directed conversation. This dialogical model gives new meaning to the key notions of relevance and probative weight, with the latter analyzed in terms of pragmatic criteria for what constitutes plausible evidence rather than truth.
This book examines the nature of evidence for character judgments, using a model of abductive reasoning called Inference To The Best Explanation. The book expands this notion based on recent work with models of reasoning using argumentation theory and artificial intelligence. The aim is not just to show how character judgments are made, but how they should be properly be made based on sound reasoning, avoiding common errors and superficial judgments.
Forensic science evidence plays a pivotal role in modern criminal proceedings. Yet such evidence poses intense practical and theoretical challenges. It can be unreliable or misleading and has been associated with miscarriages of justice. In this original and insightful book, a global team of prominent scholars and practitioners explore the contemporary challenges of forensic science evidence and expert witness testimony from a variety of theoretical, practical and jurisdictional perspectives. Chapters encompass the institutional organisation of forensic science, its procedural regulation, evaluation and reform, and brim with comparative insight.
None
This book presents an in-depth discussion on two concepts from the field of philosophy and law, in order to improve our understanding of the relation between “fact” and “evidence” in judicial process. Since fact-finding is a difficult task for judges, proof by evidence has been devised to help them access the truth. However, in the process of judicial fact-finding, there is always a gap between fact and truth. This book covers a wide range of topics, from reflections on the concept of “fact,” “evidence” and “fact-finding” in the field of philosophy and law to individual case studies. As such it is a useful reference resource on the continuing research on the judicial proof process for students and scholars.
This comprehensive guide not only analyzes every applicable rule of civil procedure, but also gives you practice-proven techniques for evaluating what motions will work most effectively in each of your cases. From early pretrial motions dealing with complaints and jurisdiction to appellate motion practice for both victor and vanquished, Motion Practice, Eighth Edition shows you both what is permissible and what is advisable in such aspects of motion practice as:
"As Gary Lawson shows, legal claims are inherently objects of proof, and whether or not the law acknowledges the point openly, proof of legal claims is just a special case of the more general norms governing proof of any claim. As a result, similar principles of evidentiary admissibility, standards of proof, and burdens of proof operate, and must operate, in the background of claims about the law. This book brings these evidentiary principles for proving law out of the shadows so that they can be analyzed, clarified, and discussed."--Amazon website.
Philosophers have gradually accepted axiology as one branch of philosophy. As a basic category belonging to axiology and philosophy, "value" is the general abstraction of concrete value formation in various fields including utility, ethics and appreciation of the beauty. The problem of value is essentially a problem of historical activities of practice in human society. The axiology based on the scientific practice view insists on the principle of unification between theory and practice, truth and value. In research of axiology, the relation between subjectivity and objectivity of values is a problem that must be solved in the first place. The modern conversation of value philosophy is the academic and practical demands of the value philosophy research in China. Value evaluation is an important part of the axiology. In order to deepen the research of value philosophy and to promote the development of current value philosophy, we must have scientific mode of thinking suitable for the nature of value. It is the base of value relation, the origin of value needs, the process of value creation and actualization and the fundamental way to proving ones value as a human being.
None