Artificial Intelligence and Law 15 (4):429-447 (2007)
|Abstract||This paper argues that formal models of coherence are useful for constructing a legal epistemology. Two main formal approaches to coherence are examined: coherence-based models of belief revision and the theory of coherence as constraint satisfaction. It is shown that these approaches shed light on central aspects of a coherentist legal epistemology, such as the concept of coherence, the dynamics of coherentist justification in law, and the mechanisms whereby coherence may be built in the course of legal decision-making|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Sven Ove Hansson (2006). Coherence in Epistemology and Belief Revision. Philosophical Studies 128 (1):93 - 108.
Staffan Angere (2007). The Defeasible Nature of Coherentist Justification. Synthese 157 (3):321 - 335.
Thomas Bartelborth (1999). Coherence and Explanations. Erkenntnis 50 (2-3):209-224.
Hans Rott (1999). Coherence and Conservatism in the Dynamics of Belief. Erkenntnis 50 (2-3):387-412.
Stefan Schubert & Erik J. Olsson (2012). On the Coherence of Higher-Order Beliefs. Southern Journal of Philosophy 50 (1):112-135.
Barbara Baum Levenbook (1984). The Role of Coherence in Legal Reasoning. Law and Philosophy 3 (3):355 - 374.
Amalia Amaya (2008). Justification, Coherence, and Epistemic Responsibility in Legal Fact-Finding. Episteme 5 (3):pp. 306-319.
Amalia Amaya (2011). Legal Justification by Optimal Coherence. Ratio Juris 24 (3):304-329.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads55 ( #18,310 of 549,122 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #63,361 of 549,122 )
How can I increase my downloads?