- New
-
Topics
- All Categories
- Metaphysics and Epistemology
- Value Theory
- Science, Logic, and Mathematics
- Science, Logic, and Mathematics
- Logic and Philosophy of Logic
- Philosophy of Biology
- Philosophy of Cognitive Science
- Philosophy of Computing and Information
- Philosophy of Mathematics
- Philosophy of Physical Science
- Philosophy of Social Science
- Philosophy of Probability
- General Philosophy of Science
- Philosophy of Science, Misc
- History of Western Philosophy
- Philosophical Traditions
- Philosophy, Misc
- Other Academic Areas
- Journals
- Submit material
- More
Is the idea of objective probability incoherent?
Law and Philosophy 29 (4):419-432 (2010)
Abstract
This article has no associated abstract. (fix it)Author's Profile
My notes
Similar books and articles
Resulting Harms and Objective Risks as Constraints on Punishment.Peter Westen - 2010 - Law and Philosophy 29 (4):401-418.
The general/special distinction in criminal law, tort law and legal theory.Peter Cane - 2007 - Law and Philosophy 26 (5):465-500.
Analytics
Added to PP
2010-04-18
Downloads
58 (#284,128)
6 months
8 (#415,230)
2010-04-18
Downloads
58 (#284,128)
6 months
8 (#415,230)
Historical graph of downloads
Author's Profile
Citations of this work
Taking Responsibility for Negligence and Non-negligence.Garrath Williams - 2020 - Criminal Law and Philosophy 14 (1):113-134.
PhilPapers logo by Andrea Andrews and Meghan Driscoll.
This site uses cookies and Google Analytics (see our terms & conditions for details regarding the privacy implications). Use of this site is subject to terms & conditions.
All rights reserved by The PhilPapers Foundation
Server: philpapers-web-68866f4b87-7qn45 uwo