David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Law and Contemporary Problems 72 (1) (2009)
Because its business is to resolve disputed issues, the law very often calls on those fields of science where the pressure of commercial interests is most severe. Because the legal system aspires to handle disputes promptly, the scientific questions to which it seeks answers will often be those for which all the evidence is not yet in. Because of its case-specificity, the legal system often demands answers of a kind science is not well-equipped to supply; and, for related reasons, constitutes virtually the entire market for certain fields of forensic science and for certain psychiatric specialties. Because of its adversarial character, the law tends to draw in scientists who are more willing than most to give an opinion on less-than-overwhelming evidence; and the more often such a witness testifies, the more unbudgeably confident he may become in his opinion. Legal rules can make it impossible to bring potentially useful scientific information to light, and the legal penchant for “indicia” and the like can transform scientific subtleties into legal shibboleths. And because of its concern for precedent, and the desideratum of finality, the law sometimes lags behind scientific advances.
|Keywords||Science and the law|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Susan Haack (2012). The Embedded Epistemologist: Dispatches From the Legal Front. Ratio Juris 25 (2):206-235.
Paul Roberts (2013). Renegotiating Forensic Cultures: Between Law, Science and Criminal Justice. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 44 (1):47-59.
Colleen Murphy & Paolo Gardoni (2011). Evaluating the Source of the Risks Associated with Natural Events. Res Publica 17 (2):125-140.
Susan Haack (2008). The Pluralistic Universe of Law: Towards a Neo-Classical Legal Pragmatism. Ratio Juris 21 (4):453-480.
Similar books and articles
Helen Reece (ed.) (1998). Law and Science. Oxford University Press.
Stig Jørgensen (1978). Values in Law: Ideas, Principles and Rules. Juristforbundet.
J. W. Harris (1979). Law and Legal Science: An Inquiry Into the Concepts Legal Rule and Legal System. Oxford University Press.
Joseph Raz (1979). The Authority of Law: Essays on Law and Morality. Oxford University Press.
Robert S. Summers (2006). Form and Function in a Legal System: A General Study. Cambridge University Press.
Michel van de Kerchove (1993). The Legal System Between Order and Disorder. Oxford University Press.
Roger Stuart Berkowitz (2005/2010). The Gift of Science: Leibniz and the Modern Legal Tradition. Harvard University Press.
Susan Haack (2008). Of Truth, in Science and in Law. Brooklyn Law Review 73 (2).
Added to index2009-09-03
Total downloads56 ( #59,974 of 1,725,822 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #268,283 of 1,725,822 )
How can I increase my downloads?