This category needs an editor. We encourage you to help if you are qualified.
Volunteer, or read more about what this involves.
Related categories
Siblings:
42 found
Search inside:
(import / add options)   Sort by:
  1. Jami L. Anderson (1999). Annulment Retributivism: A Hegelian Theory of Punishment. Cambridge University Press 5 (4):363-388.
    Despite the bad press that retributivism often receives, the basic assumptions on which this theory of punishment rests are generally regarded as being attractive and compelling. First of these is the assumption that persons are morally responsible agents and that social practices, such as criminal punishment, must acknowledge that fact. Additionally, retributivism is committed to the claim that punishment must be proportionate to the crime, and not determined by such utilitarian concerns as the welfare of society, or the hope of (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. Michael Blake (2012). International Law and Global Justice. In Marmor Andrei (ed.), The Routledge Companion to Philosophy of Law. Routledge
  3. Karin Boxer (2014). Hart's Senses of 'Responsibility'. In C. G. Pulman (ed.), Hart on Responsibility.
  4. Thom Brooks (2003). Does Philosophy Deserve a Place at the Supreme Court? Rutgers Law Record 27 (1):1-17.
    This Comment demonstrates that policy judgements are not masked by philosophical references, nor do philosophers play any crucial role in contentious judicial decisions. Neomi Rao’s study is flawed for many reasons: incomplete content analysis, poor assessment of data, and an inadequate definition of philosophy. She should be criticised for hypocritically praising Court philosopher references in some instances and not others, especially with regard to the Court’s early development. This Comment searched unsuccessfully for an instance where philosophers were cited just once (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  5. G. A. Calgaro (2008). Aplicabilidade e efetividade dos direitos fundamentais: ponto de vista. Revista Mestrado Em Direito.
    This work is about current theories concerning the application of the constitutional rules, on the approach of the efficacy and effectiveness of the fundamental rights. It also suggests an alternative way of logical analysis of the problem, mainly taking in account the phenomena of the application-efficacy-effectiveness of the rules. Therefore, it discusses the dogmatic rules and proposes the logical separation between its applicability and its effectiveness, considering the effectiveness as the potential power to realize the fundamental rights.
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    | Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  6. John Danaher (forthcoming). Common Knowledge, Pragmatic Enrichment and Thin Originalism. Jurisprudence.
    The meaning of an utterance is often enriched by the pragmatic context in which it is uttered. This is because in ordinary conversations we routinely and uncontroversially compress what we say, safe in the knowledge that those interpreting us will “add in” the content we intend to communicate. Does the same thing hold true in the case of legal utterances like “This constitution protects the personal rights of the citizen” or “the parliament shall have the power to lay and collect (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  7. William A. Edmundson (2014). Why Legal Theory is Political Philosophy. Legal Theory 19 (4):1-16.
    The concept of law is not a theorist's invention but one that people use every day. Thus one measure of the adequacy of a theory of law is its degree of fidelity to the concept as it is understood by those who use it. That means as far as possible. There are important truisms about the law that have an evaluative cast. The theorist has either to say what would make those evaluative truisms true or to defend her choice to (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  8. Francisco Elías de Tejada (1965-1966). Derecho y ley en José Ortega y Gasset / Right and Law in José Ortega y Gasset. Anales de la Cátedra Francisco Suárez (5-6):109-127.
    Contents: 1. Razón del presente estudio -- 2. La formación del Derecho -- 3. Ortega y el Derecho natural -- 4. Ortega y el espíritu popular o "Volksgeist" -- 5. El Derecho y la Moral -- 6. Derecho y ley positiva -- 7. Colofón.
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  9. Guglielmo Feis (2014). Impossibilità Nel Diritto. Dissertation, Università Degli Studi di Milano
    My Ph.D. thesis œImpossibilità nel diritto€ [Impossibility in the Legal Domain] is devoted to the systematic analyses of what are called, at least prima facie, €œlegal impossibilities. My dissertation defines and isolates an area of studies - impossibility in the law - that has never been put organically together. In my work I present some case studies of normative impossibilities and discuss them from a philosophical point of view: impossible laws, impossible norms in a prescriptive theory of norms (ch. 2), (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  10. Danny Frederick (forthcoming). The Possibility of Contractual Slavery. Philosophical Quarterly.
    In contrast to eminent historical philosophers, almost all contemporary philosophers maintain that slavery is impermissible. In the enthusiasm of the Enlightenment, a number of arguments gained currency which were intended to show that contractual slavery is not merely impermissible but impossible. Those arguments are influential today in moral, legal and political philosophy, even in discussions that go beyond the issue of contractual slavery. I explain what slavery is, giving historical and other illustrations. I examine the arguments for the impossibility of (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  11. Ori J. Herstein (2009). Historic Injustice, Group Membership and Harm to Individuals: Defending Claims for Historic Justice From the Non-Identity Problem. Harvard Journal of Racial and Ethnic Justice 25:229.
    Some claim slavery did not harm the descendants of slaves since, without slavery, its descendants would never have been born and a life worth living, even one including the subsequent harms of past slavery, is preferable to never having been born at all. This creates a classic puzzle known as the non-identity argument, applied to reject the validity of claims for historic justice based on harms to descendants of victims of historic wrongs: since descendants are never harmed by historic wrongs, (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  12. Ori J. Herstein (2009). The Identity and (Legal) Rights of Future Generations. The George Washington Law Review 77:1173.
    Exploring the peculiar nature of future generations and concluding that types of future people is the most promising object on which to project our concern for future generations the article poses two main questions: “Can future people have rights?” and, if so, “Do they in fact have any rights?” The article first explains why the non-existence of future people raises doubts whether future generations can have rights. Within the philosophical literature, the leading approach explaining how future people can, nevertheless, have (...)
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  13. Mireille Hildebrandt & Katja De Vries (eds.) (2013). Privacy, Due Process and the Computational Turn. Routledge.
    Remove from this list |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  14. Adam Omar Hosein (2014). Doing, Allowing, and the State. Law and Philosophy 33 (2):235-264.
    The doing/allowing distinction plays an important role in our thinking about a number of legal issues, such as the need for criminal process protections, prohibitions on torture, the permissibility of the death penalty and so on. These are areas where, at least initially, there seem to be distinctions between harms that the state inflicts and harms that it merely allows. In this paper I will argue for the importance of the doing/allowing distinction as applied to state action. Sunstein, Holmes, Vermeule (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  15. Adam J. Kolber (2009). The Comparative Nature of Punishment. Boston University Law Review 89 (5):1565-1608.
    In tort and contract law, we calculate the harm a defendant caused a plaintiff by examining the plaintiff’s condition after an injury relative to his baseline condition. When we consider the severity of prison sentences, however, we usually ignore offenders’ baseline conditions. We deem inmates as receiving equal punishments when they are incarcerated for the same period of time under the same conditions, even though incarceration does not change their situations equally (unless they started out in identical circumstances). It is (...)
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  16. Pierre Landou (2012). L'utilité contre le mérite ? In du mot au concept, séminaire science éducation. PUG
    Article où l'on soutient l'incompatibilité du mérite et de l'utilité commune, à partir d'une lecture de la seconde proposition du premier article de la déclaration de 1789.
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  17. Leslie Marsh (2014). Special Issue of Cosmos + Taxis: Oakeshott. Cosmos + Taxis 1 (3).
  18. Marcin Matczak, A Theory That Beats the Theory? Lineages, the Growth of Signs, and Dynamic Legal Interpretation.
    Legal philosophers distinguish between a static and a dynamic interpretation of law. The former assumes that the meaning of the words used in a legal text is set at the moment of its enactment and does not change with time. The latter allows the interpreters to update the meaning and apply a contemporary understanding to the text. The dispute between these competing theories has significant ramifications for social and political life. To take an example, depending on the approach, the term (...)
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  19. Marcin Matczak (2007). Summa iniuria. O błędzie formalizmu w stosowaniu prawa. Scholar.
    The study is focused on analysing formalism which is a strategy of applying laws by stressing the formal features of the law, even if the consequences of the strategy like that are difficult to accept in light of legal principles and the general requirement of equity. Contrary to the common view presented in the legal literature, the study sets out arguments that the formalism is neither justified in the tradition of legal positivism, neither in the idea of the rule of (...)
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  20. Marcin Matczak (2007). Semantyka Kripkego-Putnama a język prawny. Studia Semiotyczne 26:307-329.
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  21. Mary Kate McGowan (2012). On 'Whites Only' Signs and Racist Hate Speech: Verbal Acts of Racial Discrimination. In Mary Kate McGowan Ishani Maitra (ed.), Speech and harm: Controversies over Free Speech. Oxford University Press
  22. Joseph D. Osel, Police Ethics Radically Revised: Corruption of the Noble Cause. [REVIEW]
  23. Jennifer W. Primmer (2014). Beyond the Law-State: The Adequacy of Raz’s Account of Legal Systems in Explaining Intra-State and Supra-State Legality. Ratio Juris 28 (1):149-158.
    I argue that there are two conceptions of ‘comprehensiveness’: 1) Raz’s strong conception whereby comprehensiveness entails supremacy, and 2) a weak conception whereby comprehensiveness does not entail supremacy. The latter is sufficient to distinguish legal and non-legal authorities, and unlike Raz’s notion of comprehensiveness, allows one to account for both intra-state forms of legality (e.g., the federal-provincial relation in Canada) and supra-state forms of legality (e.g., the European Union). Moreover, although it is ideal for legal systems to claim supremacy, it (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  24. Massimo Renzo (2011). State Legitimacy and Self-Defence. Law and Philosophy 30 (5):575-601.
  25. Massimo Renzo (2008). Duties of Samaritanism and Political Obligation. Legal Theory 14 (3):193–217.
    In this article I criticize a theory of political obligation recently put forward by Christopher Wellman. Wellman's “samaritan theory” grounds both state legitimacy and political obligation in a natural duty to help people in need when this can be done at no unreasonable cost. I argue that this view is not able to account for some important features of the relation between state and citizens that Wellman himself seems to value. My conclusion is that the samaritan theory can only be (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  26. David Rondel (2014). Review of Pragmatism, Law, and Language. [REVIEW] Law and Philosophy 33 (5):683-688.
  27. Re'em Segev (2013). Making Sense of Discrimination. Ratio Juris (1):47-78.
    Discrimination is a central moral and legal concept. However, it is also a contested one. Particularly, accounts of the wrongness of discrimination often rely on controversial and particular assumptions. In this paper, I argue that a theory of discrimination that relies on premises that are general (rather than unique to the concept of discrimination) and widely accepted provides a plausible (exhaustive) account of the concept of wrongful discrimination. According to the combined theory, wrongful discrimination consists of allocating a benefit that (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  28. Re'em Segev (2012). Justification Under Uncertainty. Law and Philosophy 31 (5):523-563.
    There is a controversy as to the moral status of an action in the face of uncertainty concerning a non-moral fact that is morally significant (according to an applicable moral standard): According to the objective conception, the right action is determined in light of the truth, namely the actual state of affairs (regarding the pertinent fact), whereas according to the subjective conception, the right action depends on the epistemic state of the agent, namely her (justified) belief (concerning the pertinent fact). (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  29. Re'em Segev (2011). Governmental Power: Quality or Identity? Comment on Alon Harel's Argument Against Outsourcing Violence. Law and Ethics of Human Rights 5 (2):416-423.
    What is the appropriate division of power between public officials and private individuals? The straightforward answer to this question, it seems, is that an official should have a power if she employs it (morally) better compared to a private individual. However, Alon Harel argues that this answer is misguided, or at least partially, since there are some decisions—mainly concerning the employment of violence—that should be made and implemented only by public officials regardless of the (relative) moral quality of the decision (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  30. Re'em Segev (2010). Is the Criminal Law (So) Special? Comments on Douglas Husak’s Theory of Criminalization. Jerusalem Review of Legal Studies 1 (1):3-20.
    This is Re'em Segev's contribution to the symposium on Douglas Husak's book "Overcriminalization.".
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  31. Re'em Segev (2009). Sub-Optimal Justification and Justificatory Defenses. Criminal Law and Philosophy 4 (1):57-76.
    Justificatory defenses apply to actions that are generally wrong and illegal—mainly since they harm people—when they are (exceptionally) justified—usually since they prevent (more serious) harm to others. A strict conception of justification limits justificatory defenses to actions that reflect all pertinent principles in the optimal manner. A more relaxed conception of justification applies (also) to actions that do not reflect all pertinent principles optimally due to (unjustified) mistake but are not too far from this optimum. In the paper, I consider (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  32. Re'em Segev (2009). Balancing, Judicial Review and Disobedience: Comments on Richard Posner’s Analysis of Anti-Terror Measures (Not a Suicide Pact). Israel Law Review 43 (2):234-247.
    The general assumption that underlines Richard Posner’s argument in his book Not a Suicide Pact is that decisions concerning rights and security in the context of modern terrorism should be made by balancing competing interests. This assumption is obviously correct if one refers to the most rudimentary sense of balancing, namely, the idea that normative decisions should be made in light of the importance of the relevant values and considerations. However, Posner advocates a more specific conception of balancing, both substantively (...)
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  33. Re'em Segev (2008). The Distributive Justice Theory of Self-Defense: A Response to Whitley Kaufman. Ethics and International Affairs 22 (1).
    In several papers, I have argued for a theory of distributive justice and considered its implications. This theory includes a principle of responsibility that was endorsed by others within an account of defensive force (self-defense and defense of others). Whitley Kaufman criticizes this account which he refers to as the "distributive justice theory of self-defense" (DJ theory). In this paper, I respond to this criticism. I argue that Kaufman presents the theory inaccurately, that his standard of evaluation of the theory (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  34. Re'em Segev (2008). Weighing Values and Balancing Interests. Israel Democracy Institute.
    One of the central normative questions regards a decision between conflicting moral values. A decision of this nature is often required in disciplines such as philosophy, economics and law. According to common terminology, a decision between conflicting values reflects a balance of values, considerations or interests. Several types of questions arise in this context. One category includes substantive questions: which values exist, which considerations should be derived from these values, what is the degree of importance of these considerations, and which (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  35. Re'em Segev (2008). Freedom of Expression: Justifications & Restrictions. Israel Democracy Institute.
    "Freedom of expression" is a complex notion that reflects various considerations and raises many questions related to their content and interaction. This paper is an abstract of a book that considers general aspects regarding the justification and the limits of freedom of expression and analyzes exiting law in light of this normative discussion. Particularly, it considers the way to determine the proper scope of freedom of expression; first-order and second-order considerations in favor and against freedom of expression, both in general (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  36. Re'em Segev (2001). Freedom of Expression Against Governmental Authorities. Israel Democracy Institute.
    The subject of this study is the justification for limiting negative expression directed at the government: its institutions and public officials, in order to preserve public faith in government. This paper is an abstract of a book that considers this question. The conclusion is that since the value of speech concerned with the performance of government is very high and the interest in protecting the status of government is limited and typically not substantial, there is generally no justification for legal (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  37. Katrina L. Sifferd (2013). Translating Scientific Evidence Into the Language of the ‘Folk’: Executive Function as Capacity-Responsibility. In Nicole A. Vincent (ed.), Legal Responsibility and Neuroscience. Oxford University Press
    There are legitimate worries about gaps between scientific evidence of brain states and function (for example, as evidenced by fMRI data) and legal criteria for determining criminal culpability. In this paper I argue that behavioral evidence of capacity, motive and intent appears easier for judges and juries to use for purposes of determining criminal liability because such evidence triggers the application of commonsense psychological (CSP) concepts that guide and structure criminal responsibility. In contrast, scientific evidence of neurological processes and function (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  38. Lawrence B. Solum (1992). Legal Personhood for Artificial Intelligences. North Carolina Law Review 70:1231.
    Could an artificial intelligence become a legal person? As of today, this question is only theoretical. No existing computer program currently possesses the sort of capacities that would justify serious judicial inquiry into the question of legal personhood. The question is nonetheless of some interest. Cognitive science begins with the assumption that the nature of human intelligence is computational, and therefore, that the human mind can, in principle, be modelled as a program that runs on a computer. Artificial intelligence (AI) (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  39. Irving Thalberg (1971). Hart on Strict Liability and Excusing Conditions. Ethics 81 (2):150-160.
  40. Piers Norris Turner (2015). Mill and the Liberal Rejection of Legal Moralism. History of Philosophy Quarterly 32 (1):79-99.
    This article examines John Stuart Mill's position as the principal historical opponent of legal moralism. I argue that inattention to the particular form of his opposition to legal moralism has muddied the interpretation of his liberty principle. Specifically, Mill does not endorse what I call the illegitimacy thesis, according to which appeals to harmless wrongdoings, whether or not they exist, are illegitimate in the justification of legal interference.
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  41. Bas van der Vossen (2011). Assessing Law's Claim to Authority. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 31 (3):481-501.
    The idea that law claims authority (LCA) has recently been forcefully criticized by a number of authors. These authors present a new and intriguing objection, arguing that law cannot be said to claim authority if such a claim is not justified. That is, these authors argue that the view that law does not have authority viciously conflicts with the view that law claims authority. I will call this the normative critique of LCA. In this article, I assess the normative critique (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  42. Radosław Zyzik (2012). Genetyka Behawioralna Na Sali Sądowej [Behavioral Genetics in the Courtroom]. Forum Prawnicze 3 (11):27-42.
    W artykule została postawiona teza, że bezpośrednie wykorzystanie osiągnięć genetyki behawioralnej w naukach prawnych jest przedwczesne i wątpliwe pod względem metodologicznym. Struktura artykułu przedstawia się następująco. W pierwszej kolejność zaprezentowane zostały sprawy, w których genetyka behawioralna została wykorzystana (Bayout, Stefani, Landrigan). W kolejnym kroku możliwe sposoby pojawienia się tego typu dowodów w procesach karnych (np. wina, złagodzenie kary) są analizowane i krytycznie omawiane. Ostatnie dwie części artykułu poświęcone zostały analizie badań genetycznych mającej na celu ustalenie związku pomiędzy genami a zachowaniem. (...)
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation