This category needs an editor. We encourage you to help if you are qualified.
Volunteer, or read more about what this involves.
Related categories

72 found
Order:
1 — 50 / 72
  1. Ferzander’s Surrebuttal.Larry Alexander & Kimberly Kessler Ferzan - 2012 - Criminal Law and Philosophy 6 (3):463-465.
  2. “Moore or Less” Causation and Responsibility.Larry Alexander & Kimberly Kessler Ferzan - 2012 - Criminal Law and Philosophy 6 (1):81-92.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   4 citations  
  3. A Proposed Solution to the Paradox of "Causation in the Law".Frederic Stuart Baker - 1987 - Dissertation, Stanford University
    The thesis which I develop in this study is that the notion of cause which is used in law cases is defined by the purpose and scope of the legal inquiry. I attempt to clarify this thesis by analyzing the account of legal causation discussed by H. L. A. Hart and Tony Honore in their work Causation in the Law. ;H. & H. contend that in legal cases causal issues are decided according to a common-sense notion of cause which is (...)
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  4. Legal Causation and Imputation in English Law (Causalité Juridique Et Imputation: Réflexions Sur Quelques Développements Récents En Droit Anglais).Stathis Banakas - unknown
    This paper, written in French, discusses legal causation in the light of recent developments in English Tort law.
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  5. Complicity.Saba Bazargan-Forward - 2017 - In Marija Jankovic & Kirk Ludwig (eds.), Routledge Handbook on Collective Intentionality. Routledge University Press.
    Complicity marks out a way that one person can be liable to sanctions for the wrongful conduct of another. After describing the concept and role of complicity in the law, I argue that much of the motivation for presenting complicity as a separate basis of criminal liability is misplaced; paradigmatic cases of complicity can be assimilated into standard causation-based accounts of criminal liability. But unlike others who make this sort of claim I argue that there is still room for genuine (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  6. Book Review:Causation in the Law. H. L. A. Hart, Tony Honore. [REVIEW]Lawrence C. Becker - 1987 - Ethics 97 (3):664-.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  7. Causal Proportions and Moral Responsibility.Sara Bernstein - forthcoming - In Oxford Studies in Agency and Responsibility.
    This paper poses an original puzzle about the relationship between causation and moral responsibility called The Moral Difference Puzzle. Using the puzzle, the paper argues for three related ideas: (1) the existence of a new sort of moral luck; (2) an intractable conflict between the causal concepts used in moral assessment; and (3) inability of leading theories of causation to capture the sorts of causal differences that matter for moral evaluation of agents’ causal contributions to outcomes.
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  8. Normativity, Fairness, and the Problem of Factual Uncertainty.Andrew Botterell & Chris Essert - 2010 - Osgoode Hall Law Journal 47 (4):663-693.
    This article concerns the problem of factual uncertainty in negligence law. We argue that negligence law’s insistence that fair terms of interaction be maintained between individuals—a requirement that typically manifests itself in the need for the plaintiff to prove factual or “but-for” causation—sometimes allows for the imposition of liability in the absence of such proof. In particular, we argue that the but-for requirement can be abandoned in certain situations where multiple defendants have imposed the same unreasonable risk on a plaintiff, (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  9. Epidemiological Evidence in Proof of Specific Causation.Alex Broadbent - 2011 - Legal Theory 17 (4):237-278.
    This paper seeks to determine the significance, if any, of epidemiological evidence to prove the specific causation element of liability in negligence or other relevant torts—in particular, what importance can be attached to a relative risk > 2, where that figure represents a sound causal inference at the general level. The paper discusses increased risk approaches to epidemiological evidence and concludes that they are a last resort. The paper also criticizes the proposal that the probability of causation can be estimated (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  10. Fact and Law in the Causal Inquiry.Alex Broadbent - 2009 - Legal Theory 15 (3):173-191.
    This paper takes it as a premise that a distinction between matters of fact and of law is important in the causal inquiry. But it argues that separating factual and legal causation as different elements of liability is not the best way to implement the fact/law distinction. What counts as a cause-in-fact is partly a legal question; and certain liability-limiting doctrines under the umbrella of “legal causation” depend on the application of factual-causal concepts. The contrastive account of factual causation proposed (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   4 citations  
  11. Analysis of Legal Responsibility in the Case of Causing Damage (From the Standpoint of General Theory and Philosophy of Law).Luka Burazin - unknown
    By taking as its starting point the results of criticism of the understanding of the duty of reparation as a type of civil law sanction, the article examines the possible changes in the contents of the concept of legal responsibility in the case of causing damage. Therefore, the author first analyzed the concept of legal responsibility from the standpoint of the General Theory and Philosophy of Law and identified its basic characteristics: normativity, relatedness, groundedness in the applicable legal procedure, personal (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  12. Causation and Liability in Tort Law.Desmond M. Clarke - 2014 - Jurisprudence 5 (2):217-243.
    Many recent decisions in tort law attempt to combine two conceptually incommensurable features: a traditional 'but for' test of factual causation, and the scientific or medical evidence that is required to explain how some injury occurred. Even when applied to macroscopic objects, the 'but for' test fails to identify causes, because it merely rephrases in the language of possible worlds what may be inferred from what is inductively known about the actual world. Since scientific theories explain the occurrence of events (...)
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  13. Moore's Account of Causation and Responsibility, and the Problem of Omissive Overdetermination.Phil Dowe - 2013 - Jurisprudence 4 (1):115-120.
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  14. A Cognitive Neuroscience Framework for Understanding Causal Reasoning and the Law.Jonathan Fugelsang & Dunbar & Kevin - 2006 - In Semir Zeki & Oliver Goodenough (eds.), Law and the Brain. Oxford University Press.
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  15. Hart and Honoré on Causation in the Law.Haskell Fain - 1966 - Inquiry : An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 9 (1-4):322-338.
    Hart and Honoré contend, in their book Causation in the Law, that causal appraisals in everyday life and in the law can be made, with justifiable confidence, without appealing to relevant general laws; that in order to grasp the workings of causal notions in everyday life and the law, it is sufficient to note that causes are events which interfere with or intervene in the course of events which would normally have taken place. This thesis is criticized on the ground (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  16. Responsibility Regardless of Causation.Federico Faroldi - 2014 - In Bacchini, Dell'Utri & Caputo (eds.), New Advances in Causation, Agency, and Moral Responsibility. Cambridge Scholars Press.
    This paper deals with the relationship between legal responsibility and causation. I argue that legal responsibility is not necessarily rooted in causation. The general claim I aim to disprove is that responsibility is descriptive because it is fundamentally rooted in causality, and causality is metaphysically real and founded. My strategy is twofold. First, I show (in §1) that there are significant and independent non- causal form of responsibility that cannot be reduced to causal responsibility; second, in §2, I show that (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  17. The Normative Structure of Responsibility.Federico Faroldi - 2014 - College Publications.
  18. Causal Legal Semantics: A Critical Assessment.Brian Flanagan - 2013 - Journal of Moral Philosophy 10 (1):3-24.
    A provision’s legal meaning is thought by many to be a function of its literal meaning. To explain the appearance that lawyers are arguing over a provision’s legal meaning and not just over which outcome would be more prudent or morally preferable, some legal literalists claim that a provision’s literal meaning may be causally, rather than conventionally, determined. I argue, first, that the proposed explanation is inconsistent with common intuitions about legal meaning; second, that explaining legal disagreement as a function (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  19. Hart and Honoré: Causation in the Law.Philippa Foot - 1963 - Philosophical Review 72 (4):505-515.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  20. A Cognitive Neuroscience Framework for Understanding Causal Reasoning and the Law.Jonathan A. Fugelsang & Kevin N. Dunbar - 2006 - In Semir Zeki & Oliver Goodenough (eds.), Law and the Brain. Oxford University Press. pp. 157--166.
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  21. The Kishon Affair: Science, Law, and the Politics of Causation.Tal Golan - 2010 - Science in Context 23 (4):535-569.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  22. Causation in the Law.M. P. Golding - 1962 - Journal of Philosophy 59 (4):85-95.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  23. M.S. Moore, Causation and Responsibility: An Essay in Law, Morals, and Metaphysics.Peter A. Graham - 2013 - Journal of Moral Philosophy 10 (2):244-246.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  24. Causation Outside the Law.Hyman Gross & Ross Harrison - unknown
    In their important book, Causation in the Law, H. L. A. Hart and Tony Honore argue that causation in the law is based on causation outside the law, that the causal principles the courts rely on to determine legal responsibility are based on distinctions exercised in ordinary causal judgments. A distinction that particularly concerns them is one that divides factors that are necessary or sine qua non for an effect into those that count as causes for purposes of legal responsibility (...)
    Remove from this list  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  25. Proving Causation: The Holism of Warrant and the Atomism of Daubert.Susan Haack - 2008 - Journal of Health and Biomedical Law 4:253-289.
    In many toxic-tort cases - notably in Oxendine v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc, and in Joiner v. G.E., - plaintiffs argue that the expert testimony they wish to present, though no part of it is sufficient by itself to establish causation "by a preponderance of the evidence," is jointly sufficient to meet this standard of proof; and defendants sometimes argue in response that it is a mistake to imagine that a collection of pieces of weak evidence can be any stronger (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   5 citations  
  26. Causation in the Law. By H. L. A. Hart and A. M. Honore. Oxford: The Clarendon Press, 1959. Pp. XXXII 454. 55s.R. Hancock - 1961 - American Journal of Jurisprudence 6 (1):143-152.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  27. Is the Risk–Liability Theory Compatible with Negligence Law?Toby Handfield & Trevor Pisciotta - 2005 - Legal Theory 11 (4):387-404.
    David McCarthy has recently suggested that our compensation and liability practices may be interpreted as reflecting a fundamental norm to hold people liable for imposing risk of harm on others. Independently, closely related ideas have been criticised by Stephen R. Perry and Arthur Ripstein as incompatible with central features of negligence law. We aim to show that these objections are unsuccessful against McCarthy’s Risk–liability theory, and that such an approach is a promising means both for understanding the moral basis of (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (8 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  28. Causation in the Law.H. L. A. Hart & Tony Honoré - 1959 - Oxford University Press UK.
    An updated and extended second edition supporting the findings of its well-known predecessor which claimed that courts employ common-sense notions of causation in determining legal responsibility.
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  29. Commonsense Causal Explanation in a Legal Domain.Rinke Hoekstra & Joost Breuker - 2007 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 15 (3):281-299.
    In this paper, we present an approach to commonsense causal explanation of stories that can be used for automatically determining the liable party in legal case descriptions. The approach is based on, a core ontology for law that takes a commonsense perspective. Aside from our thesis that in the legal domain many terms still have a strong commonsense flavour, the descriptions of events in legal cases, as e.g. presented at judicial trials, are cast in commonsense terms as well. We present (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  30. Causation in the Law.Antony Honoré - 2008 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
  31. Necessary Connections in Context.Alex Kaiserman - 2017 - Erkenntnis 82 (1):45-64.
    This paper combines the ancient idea that causes necessitate their effects with Angelika Kratzer’s semantics of modality. On the resulting view, causal claims quantify over restricted domains of possible worlds determined by two contextually determined parameters. I argue that this view can explain a number of otherwise puzzling features of the way we use and evaluate causal language, including the difference between causing an effect and being a cause of it, the sensitivity of causal judgements to normative facts, and the (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  32. The Confirmation of Singular Causal Statements by Carnap’s Inductive Logic.Yusuke Kaneko - 2012 - Logica Year Book 2011.
    The aim of this paper is to apply inductive logic to the field that, presumably, Carnap never expected: legal causation. Legal causation is expressible in the form of singular causal statements; but it is distinguished from the customary concept of scientific causation, because it is subjective. We try to express this subjectivity within the system of inductive logic. Further, by semantic complement, we compensate a defect found in our application, to be concrete, the impossibility of two-place predicates (for causal relationship) (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  33. Making Causal Counterfactuals More Singular, and More Appropriate for Use in Law.Geert Keil - 2013 - In Benedikt Kahmen Markus Stepanians (ed.), Causation and Responsibility: Critical Essays. De Gruyter. pp. 157-189.
    Unlike any other monograph on legal liability, Michael S. Moore’s book CAUSATION AND RESPONSIBILITY contains a well-informed and in-depth discussion of the metaphysics of causation. Moore does not share the widespread view that legal scholars should not enter into metaphysical debates about causation. He shows respect for the subtleties of philosophical debates on causal relata, identity conditions for events, the ontological distinctions between events, states of affairs, facts and tropes, and the counterfactual analysis of event causation, and he considers all (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  34. Right and Wrong.John-Michael Kuczynski - 2016 - Amazon Digital Services LLC.
    In this book, it is shown that moral integrity is necessary for psychological integrity and, therefore, that it is not possible to live well without living ethically. In the process of establishing this profound truth, Dr. Kuczynski explains what right and wrong are and how we know the difference between the two.
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  35. Singular Causal Statements and Strict Deterministic Laws.Noa Latham - 1987 - Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 68 (1):29-43.
  36. Causation in AI and Law.Jos Lehmann, Joost Breuker & Bob Brouwer - 2004 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 12 (4):279-315.
    Reasoning about causation in fact is an essential element of attributing legal responsibility. Therefore, the automation of the attribution of legal responsibility requires a modelling effort aimed at the following: a thorough understanding of the relation between the legal concepts of responsibility and of causation in fact; a thorough understanding of the relation between causation in fact and the common sense concept of causation; and, finally, the specification of an ontology of the concepts that are minimally required for (automatic) common (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  37. An Ontology of Physical Causation as a Basis for Assessing Causation in Fact and Attributing Legal Responsibility.Jos Lehmann & Aldo Gangemi - 2007 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 15 (3):301-321.
    Computational machineries dedicated to the attribution of legal responsibility should be based on (or, make use of) a stack of definitions relating the notion of legal responsibility to a number of suitably chosen causal notions. This paper presents a general analysis of legal responsibility and of causation in fact based on Hart and Honoré’s work. Some physical aspects of causation in fact are then treated within the “lite” version of DOLCE foundational ontology written in OWL-DL, a standard description logic for (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  38. The Legal Mind: Essays for Tony Honore.Neil MacCormick & Peter Birks (eds.) - 1986 - Oxford University Press UK.
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  39. Causation in Personal Injury Law: The Case for a Probabilistic Approach. [REVIEW]Chris Miller - 2014 - Topoi 33 (2):1-12.
    This paper makes the case for a wider acceptance of a probabilistic approach to causation in negligence. This acceptance would help to remove much of the incoherence which has come to afflict the English law of personal injury law. This incoherence can also be found in other common law jurisdictions (notably those of the United States, Canada and Australia). Concentrating upon recent UK case law, the argument opposes the contention that ‘naked statistics’ can play no role in establishing causation. The (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  40. Further Thoughts on Causation Prompted By Fifteen Critics.Michael S. Moore - 2013 - In Markus Stepanians & Benedikt Kahmen (eds.), Critical Essays on "Causation and Responsibility". De Gruyter. pp. 333-416.
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  41. Moore's Truths About Causation and Responsibility: A Reply to Alexander and Ferzan. [REVIEW]Michael S. Moore - 2012 - Criminal Law and Philosophy 6 (3):445-462.
    In this response to the review of Moore, Causation and Responsibility, by Larry Alexander and Kimberly Ferzan, previously published in this journal, two issues are discussed. The first is whether causation, counterfactual dependence, moral blame, and culpability, are all scalar properties or relations, that is, matters of more-or-less rather than either-or. The second issue discussed is whether deontological moral obligation is best described as a prohibition against using another as a means, or rather, as a prohibition on an agent strongly (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  42. Causation and Responsibility: An Essay in Law, Morals, and Metaphysics.Michael S. Moore - 2009 - Oxford University Press.
    The concept of causation is fundamental to ascribing moral and legal responsibility for events. Yet the precise relationship between causation and responsibility remains unclear. This book clarifies that relationship through an analysis of the best accounts of causation in metaphysics, and a critique of the confusion in legal doctrine.
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   15 citations  
  43. Causation and Responsibility.Michael S. Moore - 2008 - Oxford University Press UK.
    The concept of causation is fundamental to ascribing moral and legal responsibility for events. Yet the precise relationship between causation and responsibility remains unclear. This book clarifies that relationship through an analysis of the best accounts of causation in metaphysics, and a critique of the confusion in legal doctrine. The result is a powerful argument in favour of reforming the moral and legal understanding of how and why we attribute responsibility to agents.
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  44. Causation and Responsibility: A New Direction.Matt Mortellaro - 2009 - Libertarian Papers 1:24.
    In “Property, Causality, and Liability” and “Causation and Aggression,” Hans-Hermann Hoppe and Stephan Kinsella & Patrick Tinsley, respectively, argue against the Rothbardian position on criminal liability, especially with regard to the issue of incitement. This essay takes a critical look at the suggested approaches of both and attempts to defend the Rothbardian position on incitement from their criticisms. Further, this essay examines the views of Walter Block on incitement and attempts to correct inconsistencies in his position with regard to murder (...)
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  45. The Actor–Observer Bias and Moral Intuitions: Adding Fuel to Sinnott-Armstrong's Fire.Thomas Nadelhoffer & Adam Feltz - 2008 - Neuroethics 1 (2):133-144.
    In a series of recent papers, Walter Sinnott-Armstrong has used findings in social psychology to put pressure on the claim that our moral beliefs can be non-inferentially justified. More specifically, he has suggested that insofar as our moral intuitions are subject to what psychologists call framing effects, this poses a real problem for moral intuitionism. In this paper, we are going to try to add more fuel to the empirical fire that Sinnott-Armstrong has placed under the feet of the intuitionist. (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   24 citations  
  46. The Empiricists and Causation in Law: An Essay in Philosophy, Law, and Socio-Legal Theory.Francis O. C. Njoku - 2003 - Claretian Institute of Philosophy in Collaboration with Claretian Communications.
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  47. HART, H. L. A. And HONORÉ, A. M. - "Causation in the Law". [REVIEW]P. Nowell-Smith - 1961 - Mind 70:553.
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  48. More on the Conceptual and the Empirical: Misunderstandings, Clarifications, and Replies. [REVIEW]Michael S. Pardo & Dennis Patterson - 2011 - Neuroethics 4 (3):215-222.
    At the invitation of the Editors, we wrote an article (entitled, “Minds, Brains, and Norms”) detailing our views on a variety of claims by those arguing for the explanatory power of neuroscience in matters of law and ethics. The Editors invited comments on our article from four distinguished academics (Walter Glannon, Carl Craver, Sarah Robins, and Thomas Nadelhoffer) and invited our reply to their critique of our views. In this reply to our commentators, we correct some potential misunderstandings of our (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  49. Minds, Brains, and Norms.Dennis Patterson - 2011 - Neuroethics 4 (3):179-190.
    Arguments for the importance of neuroscience reach across many disciplines. Advocates of neuroscience have made wide-ranging claims for neuroscience in the realms of ethics, value, and law. In law, for example, many scholars have argued for an increased role for neuroscientific evidence in the assessment of criminal responsibility. In this article, we take up claims for the explanatory role of neuroscience in matters of morals and law. Drawing on our previous work together, we assess the cogency of neuroscientific explanations of (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  50. Hart on Responsibility.C. G. Pulman (ed.) - 2014 - Palgrave-Macmillan.
1 — 50 / 72