Generalizations and Reference Classes

2021 ◽  
pp. 301-314
Author(s):  
Michael S. Pardo ◽  
Ronald J. Allen

This chapter examines the implications of the reference-class problem for attempts to model the probative value of evidence in mathematical terms. This examination makes three distinct contributions to evidence scholarship. First, and most importantly, it articulates and explains the problematic relationship between algorithmic tools and legal decision-making. Second, it points out serious pitfalls to be avoided for analytical or empirical studies of juridical proof. Third, it indicates when algorithmic tools may be more or less useful in the evidentiary process. As such, the chapter offers yet another demonstration of the very complex set of relationships involving human knowledge and rationality, on the one hand, and attempts to reduce either to a set of formal concepts, on the other.

2016 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 532-556
Author(s):  
Suryapratim Roy

There has been an increasing interest in making legal decision-making and scholarship scientific or inter-disciplinary, without there being any interrogation of how or why this should be done. This has resulted in polarised views of the importance of science on one hand, and the primacy of democracy on the other. Such polarisation is not helpful primarily because both ‘science’ and ‘democracy’ remain unintelligible to those who do not have access to the particular epistemology that supports their usage. In this article, I seek to reconceptualise the conflict between democracy and science as the association of legal decision-makers and scholars with expert inquiry. I further conceptualise such association as a process that involves normative reductionism of testimonial exchange. Despite a claim to ‘a culture of justification’ in legal systems such as the European Union, the process of normative reductionism is essentially arbitrary. I seek to articulate a framework where this process may be approached in a disciplined manner, concentrating on the role of mediation and moderation of expert knowledge.


2018 ◽  
Vol 27 (3) ◽  
pp. 187
Author(s):  
Piotr Szczekocki

<p>The issues of mediation and enforcement proceedings discussed in the study are focused on presenting both these institutions functioning in the widely understood law application process. On the one hand, mediation as a supplementary form of the law application process, on the other hand, enforcement proceedings as this part of the law application process whose primary goal is execution of the legal norm specified at the earlier stages of the decision-making process. An element shared by both these institutions in the judicial law application process is an institution of a settlement agreement concluded before a mediator which is the result of mediation proceedings and provides the basis for commencement and implementation of court execution. In the procedural dimension, mediation perceived as an alternative form of dispute resolution needs to have tools guaranteeing that its provisions shall be executed in case they are not voluntarily followed. This function is fulfilled by the state which has the exclusive rights to use various forms of coercion, including enforcement, in order to implement the provisions of a legal decision.</p>


2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
John G. Conway ◽  
Scott R. Tindale

Author(s):  
Tess Wilkinson-Ryan

This chapter presents a framework for understanding the most promising contributions of psychological methods and insights for private law. It focuses on two related domains of psychological research: cognitive and social psychology. Cognitive psychology is the study of mental processes, which one might shorthand as “thinking.” Social psychology asks about the role of other people—actual, implied, or imagined—on mental states and human behavior. The chapter is oriented around five core psychological insights: calculation, motivation, emotion, social influence, and moral values. Legal scholarship by turns tries to explain legal decision-making, tries to calibrate incentives, and tries to justify its values and its means. Psychology speaks to these descriptive, prescriptive, and normative models of decision-making. The chapter then argues that psychological analysis of legal decision-making challenges the work that the idea of choice and preference is doing in private law, especially in the wake of the law and economics movement.


2005 ◽  
Vol 25 (2) ◽  
pp. 179-186 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Schredl ◽  
Arthur Funkhouser ◽  
Nicole Arn

Empirical studies largely support the continuity hypothesis of dreaming. The present study investigated the frequency and emotional tone of dreams of truck drivers. On the one hand, the findings of the present study partly support the continuity regarding the time spent with driving/being in the truck and driving dreams and, on the other hand, a close relationship was found between daytime mood (feelings of stress, job satisfaction) and dream emotions, i.e., different dream characteristics were affected by different aspects of daytime activity. The results, thus, indicate that it is necessary to define very clearly how this continuity is to be conceptualized. The approach of formulating a mathematical model (cf. [1]) should be adopted in future studies in order to specify the factors and their magnitude in the relationship between waking and dreaming.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document