Peer disagreement in law /

Peer disagreement in law /

Saved in:

Bibliographic Details
Author / Creator:	Villanueva Breulmann, Isabell, author.
Imprint:	Berlin : Duncker & Humblot, [2021] ©2021
Description:	124 pages : some illustrations ; 24 cm
Language:	English
Series:	Schriften zur Rechtstheorie, 0582-0472 ; Band 295. Schriften zur Rechtstheorie ; Bd. 295.
Subject:	Judicial process -- United States. Judicial opinions -- United States. Legal certainty -- United States. Consensus (Social sciences) -- United States. Judicial process -- Germany. Judicial opinions -- Germany. Legal certainty -- Germany. Consensus (Social sciences) -- Germany. Consensus (Social sciences) Judicial opinions. Judicial process. Legal certainty. Germany. United States.
Format:	Print Book
URL for this record:	http://pi.lib.uchicago.edu/1001/cat/bib/12572769

Hidden Bibliographic Details
ISBN:	9783428159284 3428159284
Notes:	Originally presented as the author's thesis (doctoral)--Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, 2018. Includes bibliographical references (pages 116-124) and index.
Summary:	Philosophers have been puzzled for quite some time by the fact that intelligent and generally reasonable individuals who are equally well-informed and familiar with the same bodies of evidence still disagree with one another. Legal theorists wonder why this is puzzling for philosophers in the first place as disagreement is the very foundation of their work. This book, placed at the intersection of philosophical epistemology and jurisprudence, deals with the theoretical challenges that disagreements between judges create. The philosophical debate is applied to German and American legal disputes. How can such disagreements be integrated into the general philosophical debate on »peer disagreement« and into the legal theory of judicial decisionmaking? How should one deal with such disagreements under the existing legal framework but also in terms of legal policy?...
Standard no.:	9783428159284

Description
Summary:	Philosophers have been puzzled for quite some time by the fact that intelligent and generally reasonable individuals who are equally well-informed and familiar with the same bodies of evidence still disagree with one another. Legal theorists wonder why this is puzzling for philosophers in the first place as disagreement is the very foundation of their work. This book, placed at the intersection of philosophical epistemology and jurisprudence, deals with the theoretical challenges that disagreements between judges create. The philosophical debate is applied to German and American legal disputes. How can such disagreements be integrated into the general philosophical debate on "peer disagreement" and into the legal theory of judicial decisionmaking? How should one deal with such disagreements under the existing legal framework but also in terms of legal policy?
Item Description:	Originally presented as the author's thesis (doctoral)--Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, 2018.
Physical Description:	124 pages : some illustrations ; 24 cm
Bibliography:	Includes bibliographical references (pages 116-124) and index.
ISBN:	9783428159284 3428159284
ISSN:	0582-0472 ;