Redmayne, Mike (2008) Exploring the proof paradoxes 'legal theory'. Legal theory, 14 (4). p. 281. ISSN 1352-3252
Abstract
This article explores a long-running debate in evidence theory about the significance of certain puzzling cases where there is reluctance to ascribe liability despite a high probability of liability. It focuses on certain analyses of these puzzles, distinguishing between inferential, moral, and knowledge-based analyses. The article emphasizes the richness and complexity of the puzzle cases and suggests why they are difficult to resolve.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Official URL: | http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayJourna... |
| Additional Information: | © 2008 Cambridge University Press |
| Library of Congress subject classification: | K Law > K Law (General) |
| Sets: | Departments > Law |
| Rights: | http://www.lse.ac.uk/library/rights/LSERO.htm |
| URL: | http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/24176/ |
Actions (login required)
 |
Record administration - authorised staff only |
