Fallacies in Judicial Interpretation

<p>This thesis concerns fallacies in judicial interpretation. The central contention of this thesis is that judges commit certain fallacies when interpreting language and that it is possible to detect such fallacies and arrive at alternative, non-fallacious interpretations when they occur. An instance of judicial interpretation is fallacious when it takes into account an irrelevant consideration and it is most likely that a different result would have been reached if that consideration had been omitted, or when it omits a relevant consideration and it is most likely that a different result would have been reached if that relevant consideration had been taken into account. The thesis identifies two specific fallacies which involve judges introducing an irrelevant consideration and usually involve judges omitting relevant considerations. These two fallacies are errors of categorisation, and occur when judges make an interpretive decision on the basis of the irrelevant consideration of the verbal category to which an item can be assigned rather than the relevant considerations which determine the legal category to which it should be assigned. These two fallacies are detected by assessing whether an instance of interpretation is merely based on the verbal category to which an item can be assigned or whether it is justified by relevant considerations. Alternative, non-fallacious interpretations are arrived at by introducing any relevant considerations and omitting any irrelevant considerations.</p>

Fallacies in Judicial Interpretation

<p>This thesis concerns fallacies in judicial interpretation. The central contention of this thesis is that judges commit certain fallacies when interpreting language and that it is possible to detect such fallacies and arrive at alternative, non-fallacious interpretations when they occur. An instance of judicial interpretation is fallacious when it takes into account an irrelevant consideration and it is most likely that a different result would have been reached if that consideration had been omitted, or when it omits a relevant consideration and it is most likely that a different result would have been reached if that relevant consideration had been taken into account. The thesis identifies two specific fallacies which involve judges introducing an irrelevant consideration and usually involve judges omitting relevant considerations. These two fallacies are errors of categorisation, and occur when judges make an interpretive decision on the basis of the irrelevant consideration of the verbal category to which an item can be assigned rather than the relevant considerations which determine the legal category to which it should be assigned. These two fallacies are detected by assessing whether an instance of interpretation is merely based on the verbal category to which an item can be assigned or whether it is justified by relevant considerations. Alternative, non-fallacious interpretations are arrived at by introducing any relevant considerations and omitting any irrelevant considerations.</p>

Book review essay: The Budapest School: Beyond Marxism

J.F. Dorahy's The Budapest School: Beyond Marxism (2019) offers contemporary readers a conscientious assessment of the intellectual initiatives of Ágnes Heller, György Márkus, and Ferenc Fehér, both in the years immediately following their apprenticeship with György Lukács, and later, through their independent philosophical endeavours. Dorahy's book also pinpoints the Budapest thinkers' proposal for a radical democratic reckoning, and begins to suggest how that proposal might today bear on global practice and globally-minded theories. The book is an excellent introduction to the ideas of Heller and Márkus. But through them, it is also a striking and thoroughly relevant consideration of the possibilities for an ethics of planetary commitment, and for a critical theory fixed upon incorporating the vigorous rootstock of radical democracy with a multidimensional, pluralistic social order.

European history and war: The case-study of the eighteenth century

A widely-relevant consideration of conceptual and methodological points in military history drawing on the case-study of ancien régime European warfare and the impact of the French Revolution.

U.S. Arctic policy: the agenda of 2019

This article explores the key stages of the development of U.S. policy with regards to Arctic Region. The goal is set to outline the fundamental interests of the United States in the Arctic, as well as analyze the actions aimed at their achievement. The article examines the main priorities in U.S. Arctic policy, namely the protection and preservation of resources and ecosystem in the Arctic Region, scientific study of climatic changes, peculiarities of economic development of Alaska, and national security interests of the state. The questions of interaction of Arctic states with regards to defense cooperation become increasingly relevant. Consideration of the mid-term and long-term prospects of U.S. Arctic policy allowed the author focusing attention on the news aspects of U.S. government actions. Maritime capabilities of the United States in the Arctic waters are views in the context of modern tendencies. The author attempted to trace the prospects for expansion of U.S. influence in the Arctic Region based on the current agenda of 2019.

Precision of Single-Skill Math CBM Time-Series Data: The Effect of Probe Stratification and Set Size

Comparatively little research exists on single-skill math (SSM) curriculum-based measurements (CBMs) for the purpose of monitoring growth, as may be done in practice or when monitoring intervention effectiveness within group or single-case research. Therefore, we examined a common variant of SSM-CBM: 1 digit × 1 digit multiplication. Reflecting how such measures are often used in contemporary research and practice, we examined the comparative reliability of three representative SSM-CBM set sizes of 8, 16, and 32 unique problems. In a separate study, we investigated the possible benefit of stratifying problems within operation and probe relative to random assignment. Findings suggest that SSM-CBM slope reliability benefits from explicit stratification and that set size is a relevant consideration. Implications for the selection and interpretation of SSM-CBMs when engaging in practice and research are discussed.

Important Bermuda trust decision concerning settlor’s wishes

The intersection between the court’s power to bless the decision of a trustee and the impact of a settlor’s wishes on trustee decision-making has recently been considered by the Supreme Court of Bermuda in the important decision of In the Matter of the R Trust. In blessing the decision of the trustee in this case, the court referred with approval of the dicta of the UK Supreme Court in Pitt v Holt that the settlor’s wishes are simply a “relevant consideration”.

Loss of Consciousness is Associated with Increased Neurocognitive Intra-Individual Variability Following Sports-Related Concussion

Purpose Traditional markers of concussion severity, including loss of consciousness (LOC), retrograde amnesia (RA), and post-traumatic amnesia (PTA), have been inconsistently associated with neurocognitive performance following sports-related concussion. The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether LOC, RA, and PTA influence a particular aspect of post-concussion cognitive functioning—across-test intra-individual variability (IIV). Methods Concussed athletes (N=119; 77.3% male) were evaluated, on average, 8.55 days post-concussion (SD=11.27; Mdn=4 days) via clinical interview and neuropsychological assessment. Primary outcomes of interest included two measures of IIV-an average standard deviation (ASD) score and a maximum discrepancy (MD) score-computed from 18 norm-referenced variables. Results A one-way ANCOVA adjusting for time since injury revealed a significant effect of LOC on the ASD (F(1, 116)=6.78, p=.010, ηp2=.055) and MD (F(1, 116)=5.65, p=.019, ηp2=.046) scores, such that athletes with LOC displayed significantly greater IIV than athletes without LOC. In contrast, measures of IIV did not significantly differ between athletes who did and did not experience RA or PTA (all p>.05). Conclusion LOC, but not RA or PTA, was associated with greater variability, or inconsistencies, in cognitive performance following concussion. This suggests that LOC may be a relevant consideration when evaluating post-concussion cognitive dysfunction. IIV has recently been established as a sensitive measure of cognitive functioning in a variety of clinical samples and has been associated with underlying neurobiological integrity. Taken together, our results implicate LOC as a possible contributing factor of less efficient cognitive functioning following concussion and may help detect athletes at risk for poor clinical outcomes.

Prioritarianism: A (Pluralist) Defence

A well-known objection to prioritarianism, famously levelled by Mike Otsuka and Alex Voorhoeve, is that it wrongly ignores the unity of the individual in treating intra-personal cases like inter-personal cases. In this paper we accept that there should be a moral shift between these cases, but argue that this is because autonomy is a relevant consideration in intra-personal but not inter-personal cases, and one to which pluralist prioritarians ought to attend. To avoid this response, Otsuka and Voorhoeve must (and do) assume we know nothing about the subjective information of the person being chosen for. But we show that this commits them to two controversial assumptions: that welfare consists in an objective list of goods, and – if one accepts an unorthodox but plausible account of the relationship between risk aversion and rationality – that there is only a narrow range of rational risk aversions. Only prioritarians who accept both these assumptions are on the hook of Otsuka and Voorhoeve’s objection; for all others, the examples have insufficient information, and so lose their sting.

The Functional Argument

This chapter discusses law’s capacity to fulfil its conduct-guiding function within different frameworks of practical reasoning. A functional argument of Raz is initially presented: according to this argument, authorities—including legal authorities—would not be able to fulfil their intended function if their directives operated as reasons for action that compete with opposing reasons in terms of their weight, rather than as pre-emptive reasons (Section 6.1). Several grounds for this argument are considered and found to be inadequate (Section 6.2). The spotlight is then directed onto another relevant consideration: law’s structural suitability to counteract several situational biases operative in contexts of individual and collective action (Sections 6.3.1–6.3.5). It is argued that law’s pivotal role in addressing practical problems linked with those biases strongly militate against the weighing model (Sections 6.3.6). Finally, the implications of those biases for the pre-emption thesis are discussed (Sections 6.3.7).