Book contents
- Evidential Legal Reasoning
- Evidential Legal Reasoning
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Introduction
- Part I Evidence As an Area of Knowledge
- 1 Evidence as a Multidisciplinary Field
- 2 New Directions for Evidence Science, Complex Adaptive Systems, and a Possibly Unprovable Hypothesis About Human Flourishing
- Part II Convergences between Systems
- Part III On Evidential Inferences
- Part IV Expert Evidence
- Part V Standards of Evidence As Decision-Making Rules
- Index
- References
1 - Evidence as a Multidisciplinary Field
What Do the Law and the Discipline of Law Have to Offer?
from Part I - Evidence As an Area of Knowledge
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 May 2022
Book contents
- Evidential Legal Reasoning
- Evidential Legal Reasoning
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Introduction
- Part I Evidence As an Area of Knowledge
- 1 Evidence as a Multidisciplinary Field
- 2 New Directions for Evidence Science, Complex Adaptive Systems, and a Possibly Unprovable Hypothesis About Human Flourishing
- Part II Convergences between Systems
- Part III On Evidential Inferences
- Part IV Expert Evidence
- Part V Standards of Evidence As Decision-Making Rules
- Index
- References
Summary
My concern here is with articulating what Law as a discipline or the subject matters that it studies may have to offer to a distinct and semi-autonomous multi-disciplinary field. However, it is worth emphasising that throughout history, and especially in the twentieth century, our discipline has been quite open to outside influences in respect of evidence. I am personally interested in finding practical ways forward, although this paper addresses a more intellectual question: What might we as jurists, and our heritage of both theory and practical decision-making, contribute to an enterprise devoted to stimulating cross-fertilisation, co-operation and the search for a reasonably common core or family of cross-disciplinary relations for Evidence as a recognised multi-disciplinary field?
Keywords
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Evidential Legal ReasoningCrossing Civil Law and Common Law Traditions, pp. 13 - 33Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2022
References
Allen, R. (2021). New Directions of Evidence Science, in Vázquez, C. and Ferrer, J. Beltrán, eds., Evidential Legal Reasoning, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Anderson, T., Schum, D. and Twining, W. (2005). Analysis of Evidence, 2nd ed., Cambridge, New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bentham, J. (1837–43). An Introductory View of the Rationale of the Law of Evidence for Use by Non-lawyers as well as Lawyers (ed. James Mill, circa 1810). VI Works 1–187. Bowring edition, 1837–43. Edinburgh: William Tait.Google Scholar
Calvino, I. (1974). Invisible Cities. Weaver, W. translator, New York: Harcourt Brace and Company.Google Scholar
Cohen, J. (1981). Can Human Irrationality be Experimentally Demonstrated?, Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 4 (3), 317–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Damaška, M. (1986). The Faces of Justice and State Authority, New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Dawid, P., Twining, W. and Vasilaki, M. (2011). Evidence, Inference and Enquiry, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Diamond, S. and Lempert, R. (2018). When Law Calls, Does Science Answer? A Survey of Distinguished Scientists and Engineers, Daedalus, 147 (4), 41–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gascón, M. (2010). Los hechos en el derecho. Bases argumentales de la prueba. 3rd ed., Madrid: Marcial Pons.Google Scholar
Gaskins, R. (1992). Burdens of Proof in Modern Discourse, New York: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Haack, S. (1993). Evidence and Inquiry: Towards Reconstruction in Epistemology. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Hacking, I. (1975). The Emergence of Probability, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hazard, G. and Taruffo, M. (1993). American Civil Procedure: An Introduction, New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Ho, J. L. (2015). The Legal Concept of Evidence, Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2015/entries/evidence-legal/.Google Scholar
Howlett, P. and Morgan, M. (2010). How Well Do Facts Travel? The Dissemination of Reliable Knowledge, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jackson, J. and Summers, S. (2012). The Internationalisation of Criminal Evidence: Beyond the Common Law and Civil Law Traditions, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kazdin, A. E. ed. (2000). Encyclopedia of Psychology, New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Llewellyn, K. and Hoebel, E. (1941). The Cheyenne Way. Conflict and Case Law in Primitive Jurisprudence, Norman: University of Oklahoma Press.Google Scholar
Lloyd-Bostock, S. M. (1980). Psychology in Legal Contexts: Applications and Limitations, Chichester: John Wiley and Sons Ltd.Google Scholar
Maitland, F. (2011). The Collected Papers of Frederic William Maitland, Fisher, H. A. L. ed., Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Memon, A., Vrij, A. and Bull, R. (2003). Psychology and Law: Truthfulness, Accuracy and Credibility, Chichester: Wiley.Google Scholar
Michael, J. and Adler, M. (1931). The Nature of Judicial Proof: An Inquiry into the Logical, Legal and Empirical Aspects of the Law of Evidence (private printing).Google Scholar
Postema, G. (1983). Facts, Fictions and Law: Bentham on the Foundations of Evidence, in Twining, W. ed., Facts in Law, Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner Verlag.Google Scholar
Roberts, P. and Zuckerman, A. (2010). Criminal Evidence, 3rd edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Santos, B. (1995). Toward a New Common Sense: Law, Science and Politics in the Paradigmatic Transition. London, New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Schofield, P. (2006). Utility and Democracy: The Political Thought of Jeremy Bentham. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schum, D. (1994/2001). Evidential Foundations of Probabilistic Reasoning. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.Google Scholar
Swift, E. (2000). One Hundred Years of Evidence Law Reform: Thayer’s Triumph. California Law Review, 88 (6), 2437–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tecuci, G., Schum, D., Marcu, D., and Boicu, M., (2016). Intelligence Analysis As Discovery of Evidence, Hypotheses, and Arguments: Connecting the Dots, New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thayer, J. (1898). A Preliminary Treatise on Evidence at Common Law. Boston, MA: Little Brown and Company.Google Scholar
Tillers, P. (1983). Modern Theories of Relevancy, Wigmore on Evidence, 1-1A, Boston, MA: Little Brown and Company.Google Scholar
Twining, W. (1985). Theories of Evidence: Bentham and Wigmore, London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson.Google Scholar
Twining, W. (2006). Rethinking Evidence, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Twining, W. (2019). Jurist in Context. A Memoir, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Twining, W. and Monk, I., eds. (2003). Evidence and Inference in History and Law, Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.Google Scholar
Twining, W. and Quick, E. (1994). Legal Records in the Commonwealth, Aldershot: Dartmouth Publishing Co. Ltd.Google Scholar
Vergès, E., Vial, G. and Leclerc, O. (2015). Droit de la preuve. París: Presses Universitaires de France.Google Scholar
Wigmore, J. H. (1913). The Principles of Judicial Proof as Given by Logic, Psychology and General Experience, Boston, MA: Little Brown and Company. 3rd ed., 1937. Sub Nom the Science of Judicial Proof.Google Scholar
Zuckerman, A. (1986). Law, Fact or Justice? Boston University Law Review, 66, 487–508.Google Scholar