28 found
Order:
See also
Barbara Levenbook
North Carolina State University
  1.  79
    Harming someone after his death.Barbara Baum Levenbook - 1984 - Ethics 94 (3):407-419.
    I argue for the possibility of posthumous harm based on an account of the harm of murder. I start with the deep-seated intuition that when someone is murdered he (or she) is harmed (over and above the pain of injury or dying), and argue that Feinberg's account that assumes that harm is an invasion of an interest cannot plausibly accommodate this intuition. I propose a new account of the harm of murder: it is an irreversible loss of functions necessary for (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   29 citations  
  2.  66
    Dworkin's Theoretical Disagreement Argument.Barbara Baum Levenbook - 2015 - Philosophy Compass 10 (1):1-9.
    Dworkin's theoretical disagreement argument, developed in Law's Empire, is presented in that work as the motivator for his interpretive account of law. Like Dworkin's earlier arguments critical of legal positivism, the argument from theoretical disagreement has generated a lively exchange with legal positivists. It has motivated three of them to develop innovative positivist positions. In its original guise, the argument from theoretical disagreement is presented as ‘the semantic sting argument’. However, the argument from theoretical disagreement has more than one version. (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  3.  68
    The meaning of a precedent.Barbara Baum Levenbook - 2000 - Legal Theory 6 (2):185-240.
    A familiar jurisprudential view is that a judicial decision functions as a legal precedent by laying down a rule and that the content of this rule is set by officials. Precedents can be followed only by acting in accordance with this rule. This view is mistaken on all counts. A judicial decision functions as a precedent by being an example. At its best, it is an example both for officials and for a target population. Even precedents outside of law function (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   11 citations  
  4. The role of coherence in legal reasoning.Barbara Baum Levenbook - 1984 - Law and Philosophy 3 (3):355 - 374.
    Many contemporary philosophers of law agree that a necessary condition for a decision to be legally justified, even in a hard case, is that it coheres with established law. Some, namely Sartorius and Dworkin, have gone beyond that relatively uncontroversial claim and described the role of coherence in legal justification as analogous to its role in moral and scientific justification, on contemporary theories. In this, I argue, they are mistaken. Specifically, coherence in legal justification is sometimes specific to a branch (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   8 citations  
  5. “Welfare and Harm After Death,”.Barbara Baum Levenbook - 2013 - In James Stacey Taylor (ed.), The Metaphysics and Ethics of Death: New Essays. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. pp. 188-209.
    I defend the claim that posthumous harm is possible against a simple but powerful and appealing argument for the impossibility of harm from posthumous events. I produce a counterargument against one of its assumptions. My conclusion is that the boundaries of welfare-affecting events may extend beyond the existence of the person whose welfare is in question. My case for rejecting the contrary claim avoids an objection to some familiar arguments for posthumous harm and is superior to another argument for posthumous (...)
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  6.  24
    Bibliographical essay / criminal harm.Barbara Baum Levenbook - 1982 - Criminal Justice Ethics 1 (1):48-53.
  7.  16
    Review essay / attempts as attacks.Barbara Baum Levenbook - 1999 - Criminal Justice Ethics 18 (1):52-60.
    R. A. Duff, Criminal Attempts Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1996, xxvii + 420 pp.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  8.  27
    Review essay / A theory of criminal justice.Barbara Baum Levenbook - 1982 - Criminal Justice Ethics 1 (2):60-64.
    Hyman Gross, A Theory of Criminal Justice New York: Oxford University Press, 1979, xviii + 521 pp.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  9.  29
    The parti-resultantness of requirement: An explanation that failed.T. R. Girill & Barbara Baum Levenbook - 1980 - Philosophical Studies 37 (3):237 - 249.
  10.  25
    A puzzle about legal systems and democratic theory.Barbara Baum Levenbook - 2020 - Jurisprudence 11 (2):157-168.
    Older statutes sometimes alter the legal content of newer statutes in a way not apparent from the text of the newer statutes. The puzzle is how, even if a new statute is the choice of the current polis, the legal content created in part by the elderly statute is also the choice of the current polis. I consider several possible answers, including a legislative intent account and Dworkin’s, and argue that none of them is satisfactory. I then offer my own (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  11. “Are There Any Positive Rights?”.Barbara Baum Levenbook - 1990 - Archiv für Rechts- und Sozialphilosophie 42:156-66.
    This essay is aimed at those moral philosophers who recognize a certain category of negative moral rights, but refuse to recognize a similar category of positive moral rights. That category consists of moral rights normally held by human beings. Such rights may be called "natural moral rights." -/- My thesis is that if there is a natural negative right not to be killed, then -- contra Thomson, Nozick and others -- there must be at least one natural positive right, which (...)
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  12.  42
    Discretion and Dispositive Concepts.Barbara Baum Levenbook - 1981 - Canadian Journal of Philosophy 11 (4):613 - 631.
    In this essay, I argue against a way of approaching the issue of Judicial discretion that finds its clearest exposition and highest development in recent works by Ronald Dworkin. This approach is too narrow. It ignores a kind of Judicial discretion whose existence has been maintained by jurists with discretionist sympathies, and which is philosophically significant. The kind of discretion it ignores raises the issue of the justification of adjudication as clearly as does the kind of discretion that it recognizes. (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  13.  33
    D-theories, Discretion, and the Justification of Adjudication.Barbara Baum Levenbook - 1980 - Social Theory and Practice 5 (3-4):331-345.
    This essay challenges Dworkin's account of the virtues and consistency of applying the right answer as given by a certain interpretive theory of local law (hereafter, the D-theory) with democratic theory. D-theory adjudication does not have all the virtues Dworkin claims for it. It may involve judicial law-creation as well, rather than being confined to the discovery of preexisting legal rights. It may also involve any of the morally objectionable features of judicial law-creation, including unfairness. It is not immune to (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  14. Does dignity help in thinking about paternalism?Barbara Baum Levenbook - 2018 - In Salman Khurshid, Lokendra Malik & Veronica Rodriguez-Blanco (eds.), Dignity in the legal and political philosophy of Ronald Dworkin. New Delhi, India: Oxford University Press.
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  15.  39
    How a statute applies.Barbara Baum Levenbook - 2006 - Legal Theory 12 (1):71-112.
    This essay presents a new theory of statutory application that is superior to two competitors. One of the competitors claims that statutory directives apply to act-tokens fitting the legislature's intention. The other holds that statutes apply to act-tokens that are of the genuine kinds named by the classifying words. These theories solve certain problems badly or not at all, respectively: (1) accounting for the capacity of statutes for epistemic guidance; and (2) avoiding literalism. Both do a limited job of accounting (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  16.  46
    Harming the dead, once again.Barbara Baum Levenbook - 1985 - Ethics 96 (1):162-164.
    This article responds to criticism by Don Marquis of my previous article, "Harming Someone after His Death." I argue that because the idea of surviving interests in not plausible, the harm-as-loss-theory is not on all fours with the harm-as-invasion-of-interests theory (especially when it comes to the harm of murder), and that the former is preferable.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  17. “Does Dignity Help in Thinking about Paternalism?”.Barbara Baum Levenbook - 2018 - In Levenbook Barbara Baum (ed.), The Role of Dignity in the Legal and Political Philosophy of Ronald Dworkin. Oxford University Press. pp. 221-244.
    Dworkin’s dignity framework has little explanatory value for one moral topic for which it should be especially suited: paternalistic intervention by one adult with another. The dignity framework has little epistemic value for morality regarding paternalism. Dworkin’s conception of dignity is too inchoate to illuminate why and when individual paternalism is wrong, all things considered. Dignity does somewhat better at illuminating why some types of individual paternalism are pro tanto wrong; but not other types. Moreover, the conception of dignity cannot (...)
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  18.  12
    On preferential admission.Barbara Baum Levenbook - 1980 - Journal of Value Inquiry 14 (3-4):255-273.
  19. “How to Hold the Social Fact Thesis – a Reply to Greenberg and Toh,”.Barbara Baum Levenbook - 2013 - In Leslie Green & Brian Leiter (eds.), Oxford Studies in Philosophy of Law vol. 2. Oxford UK: Oxford University Press. pp. 75-102.
    The social fact thesis, is, roughly, that law is ultimately a matter of social fact. Mark Greenberg and Kevin Toh have launched transcendental arguments against important or interesting general versions of the social fact thesis. Together, they can be read as posing a dilemma for the thesis. Suppose that many correct assertions of law are normative. Then, according to Toh, the considerations in virtue of which they are correct cannot ultimately be social facts, because the derivation of any normative conclusion (...)
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  20. Postema's account of integrity.Barbara Baum Levenbook - 2020 - In Thomas da Rosa de Bustamante & Thiago Lopes Decat (eds.), Philosophy of law as an integral part of philosophy: essays on the jurisprudence of Gerald J. Postema. New York, NY: Hart Publishing, an imprint of Bloomsbury Publishing.
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  21. “Soames, Legislative Intent, and the Meaning of a Statute,”.Barbara Baum Levenbook - 2014 - In Lind Graham Hubbs and Douglas (ed.), Pragmatism, Law, and Language, Routledge Studies in Contemporary Philosophy vol. 11. Routledge. pp. 40-55.
    A familiar jurisprudential view is that statutes have the content the legislature intended. Scott Soames has challenged this view in one form while giving credence to it in another. The burden of his recent publications on the subject is that while legislative intent in the form of legislative purpose does not determine statutory content, some legislative intentions do. I maintain that Soames inflates the role of legislative intentions and ignores a source of pragmatic information that does the bulk of the (...)
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  22.  35
    That Makes It Worse.Barbara Baum Levenbook - 1980 - The Monist 63 (2):228-245.
    This is an essay on aggravating circumstances. Rather than defend a thesis that particular things ought to be considered aggravating circumstances to wrongdoing, I assume general agreement about major sorts of aggravating circumstances; and I ask instead how they work and what their operation reveals about moral standards in general and minimal expectations in particular. In the final section of this essay, I briefly consider what can be said in defense of the commonsense principle that punishment should be more severe (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  23. The relevance of literary interpretation.Barbara Baum Levenbook - 2023 - In Thomas da Rosa de Bustamante & Margaret Martin (eds.), New essays on the Fish-Dworkin debate. New York: Hart Publishing, An Imprint of Bloomsbury Publishing.
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  24.  15
    Review of Ferdinand David Schoeman: Privacy and Social Freedom[REVIEW]Barbara Baum Levenbook - 1995 - Ethics 105 (2):421-422.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   22 citations  
  25.  18
    Book Review:Privacy and Social Freedom. Ferdinand David Schoeman. [REVIEW]Barbara Baum Levenbook - 1995 - Ethics 105 (2):421-.
  26.  29
    Book review. [REVIEW]Barbara Baum Levenbook - 1992 - Law and Philosophy 11 (4):449-455.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  27.  6
    Book Review of Ferdinand Schoeman, Privacy and Social Freedom. [REVIEW]Barbara Baum Levenbook - 1995 - Ethics 105 (2):421-422.
  28.  10
    Review: Defender of the Realm: Thomson on Rights. [REVIEW]Barbara Baum Levenbook - 1992 - Law and Philosophy 11 (4):449 - 455.