Redmayne, Mike (2008) Exploring the proof paradoxes 'legal theory'. Legal theory, 14 (4). p. 281. ISSN 1352-3252
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.
|Additional Information:||© 2008 Cambridge University Press|
|Library of Congress subject classification:||K Law > K Law (General)|
|Sets:||Departments > Law|
Actions (login required)
|Record administration - authorised staff only|