Item
| Haack, Susan | |
| 2010 March 18 | |
|
As my title indicates, [this conference] focuses on causation evidence in toxic-tort litigation; and as my sub-title suggests, it makes two main arguments, the first epistemological and the second legal. The epistemological argument is that, under certain conditions, as congeries of evidence warrants a conclusion to a higher degree than any of its components alone would do; the legal argument, interlocking with this, is that our evidence law imposes a kind of atomism than can actually impede the process of arriving at the conclusion most warranted by evidence - the effects of wich have been specially salient to causation eveidence in toxic-tort cases 1578.mp4 haack-p-causation.mp3 |
|
|
audio/mpeg video/H263 |
|
| Haack, S. (2010). Proving causation: the holism of Warrant and the Atomism of Daubert. A Grup de recerca en Filosofia del Dret. Girona: Universitat. [Consulta 26 abril 2010]. Disponible a: http://hdl.handle.net/10256.1/1578 | |
| http://hdl.handle.net/10256.1/1578 | |
| eng | |
| Universitat de Girona. Departament de Dret Privat | |
| Grup de recerca en Filosofia del Dret | |
| Aquest document est脿 subjecte a una llic猫ncia Creative Commons: Reconeixement - No comercial - Compartir igual (by-nc-sa) | |
| http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/es/deed.ca | |
|
Subst脿ncies perilloses -- Dret i legislaci贸 -- Congressos
Hazardous substances -- Law and legislation -- Congresses Dret -- Filosofia -- Congressos Law -- Philosophy -- Congresses |
|
| Proving causation: the holism of Warrant and the Atomism of Daubert | |
| info:eu-repo/semantics/lecture | |
| DUGiMedia |
