David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Cambridge University Press (2006)
The Law of Evidence has traditionally been perceived as a dry, highly technical, and mysterious subject. This book argues that problems of evidence in law are closely related to the handling of evidence in other kinds of practical decision-making and other academic disciplines, that it is closely related to common sense and that it is an interesting, lively and accessible subject. These essays develop a readable, coherent historical and theoretical perspective about problems of proof, evidence, and inferential reasoning in law. Although each essay is self-standing, they are woven together to present a sustained argument for a broad inter-disciplinary approach to evidence in litigation, in which the rules of evidence play a subordinate, though significant, role. This revised and enlarged edition includes a revised introduction, the best-known essays in the first edition, and new chapters on narrative and argumentation, teaching evidence, and evidence as a multi-disciplinary subject.
|Keywords||Evidence (Law History Evidence (Law History|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Buy the book||$12.70 used (78% off) $40.02 new (53% off) $84.99 direct from Amazon Amazon page|
|Call number||K2261.T847 2006|
|ISBN(s)||0521675375 0631170014 9780521675376|
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
Edward J. Imwinkelried (2005). Expert Testimony by Ethicists: What Should Be the Norm? Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics 33 (2):198-221.
Amalia Amaya (2011). Legal Justification by Optimal Coherence. Ratio Juris 24 (3):304-329.
Frederick Schauer (2008). In Defense of Rule-Based Evidence Law – and Epistemology Too. Episteme 5 (3):pp. 295-305.
Edward J. Imwinkelried (2005). Expert Testimony by Ethicists: What Should Be the Norm? Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 33 (2):198-221.
Donald Nicolson (1995). Telling Tales: Gender Discrimination, Gender Construction and Battered Women Who Kill. [REVIEW] Feminist Legal Studies 3 (2):185-206.
Similar books and articles
William L. Twining & Iain Hampsher-Monk (eds.) (2003). Evidence and Inference in History and Law: Interdisciplinary Dialogues. Northwestern University Press.
Alex Stein (2005). Foundations of Evidence Law. Oxford University Press.
Andrew Bell, John Swenson-Wright & Karin Tybjerg (eds.) (2008). Evidence. Cambridge University Press.
Peter Murphy (ed.) (2003). Evidence, Proof, and Facts: A Book of Sources. New York ;Oxford University Press.
Simon A. Cole, Toward Evidence-Based Evidence: Supporting Forensic Knowledge Claims in the Post-Daubert Era.
Paul Roberts & Mike Redmayne (eds.) (2007). Innovations in Evidence and Proof: Integrating Theory, Research and Teaching. Hart.
Andrew C. Stumer, Book Review: Ho, A Philosophy of Evidence Law: Justice in the Search for Truth. [REVIEW]
Gamini Lakshman Peiris (1989). Recent Trends in the Commonwealth Law of Evidence. Sarvodaya Book Pub. Services.
William L. Twining (1985). Theories of Evidence: Bentham and Wigmore. Stanford University Press.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads60 ( #67,710 of 1,790,225 )
Recent downloads (6 months)4 ( #199,513 of 1,790,225 )
How can I increase my downloads?