Episteme 5 (3):pp. 306-319 (2008)

Authors
Amalia Amaya
National Autonomous University Of Mexico
Abstract
This paper argues for a coherentist theory of the justification of evidentiary judgments in law, according to which a hypothesis about the events being litigated is justified if and only if it is such that an epistemically responsible fact-finder might have accepted it as justified by virtue of its coherence in like circumstances. It claims that this version of coherentism has the resources to address a main problem facing coherence theories of evidence and legal proof, namely, the problem of the coherence bias. The paper then develops an aretaic approach to the standards of epistemic responsibility which govern legal fact-finding. It concludes by exploring some implications of the proposed account of the justification of evidentiary judgments in law for the epistemology of legal proof
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.3366/E1742360008000415
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 70,337
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

The Structure of Empirical Knowledge.Laurence BonJour - 1985 - Cambridge, MA, USA: Harvard University Press.
Inference to the Best Explanation.Peter Lipton - 1991 - London and New York: Routledge/Taylor and Francis Group.
Law’s Empire.Ronald Dworkin - 1986 - Harvard University Press.
Judgement and Justification.William G. Lycan - 1988 - Cambridge University Press.

View all 15 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Risk.Duncan Pritchard - 2015 - Metaphilosophy 46 (3):436-461.
Coherence, Evidence, and Legal Proof.Amalia Amaya - 2013 - Legal Theory 19 (1):1-43.

View all 10 citations / Add more citations

Similar books and articles

The Incoherence of Coherence Theories.Richard Fumerton - 1994 - Journal of Philosophical Research 19:89-102.
Formal Models of Coherence and Legal Epistemology.Amalia Amaya - 2007 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 15 (4):429-447.
The Role of Coherence in Legal Reasoning.Barbara Baum Levenbook - 1984 - Law and Philosophy 3 (3):355 - 374.
The Role of Coherence in Epistemic Justification.T. Shogenji - 2001 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 79 (1):90 – 106.
Coherentism.Peter Murphy - 2006 - Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Cohering With.Erik J. Olsson - 1999 - Erkenntnis 50 (2-3):273 - 291.
Legal Justification by Optimal Coherence.Amalia Amaya - 2011 - Ratio Juris 24 (3):304-329.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2009-01-28

Total views
174 ( #67,532 of 2,508,046 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #416,715 of 2,508,046 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes