000			03298cam a2200481 i 4500
999			_c5559 _d5559
001			ocn865180061
003			OCoLC
005			20200421125219.0
008			131209s2014 nyu b 001 0 eng
010			_a 2013048953
015			_aGBB471522 _2bnb
016	7		_a016783960 _2Uk
020			_a9781107698345 _q(paperback)
020			_a1107698340 _q(paperback)
035			_a(OCoLC)865180061 _z(OCoLC)883869354
040			_aDLC _beng _erda _cTZ-ArACH
042			_apcc
049			_aTZAA
050	0	0	_aK2261 _b.H32 2014
082	0	0	_a347/.06 _223
084			_aLAW052000 _2bisacsh
100	1		_aHaack, Susan, _eauthor.
245	1	0	_aEvidence matters : _bscience, proof, and truth in the law / _cSusan Haack, University of Miami.
260			_aCambridge ; _aNew York : _bCambridge University Press, _c2007.
300			_axxvi, 416 pages ; _c24 cm.
490	1		_aLaw in context series
500			_aIncludes glossary (pages 381-390).
504			_aIncludes bibliographical references (pages 349-379) and index.
505	0	0	_tEpistemology and the law of evidence : problems and projects -- _tEpistemology legalized : or, truth, justice, and the American way -- _tLegal probabilism : an epistemological dissent -- _tIrreconcilable differences? : the troubled marriage of science and law -- _tTrial and error : two confusions in Daubert -- _tFederal philosophy of science : a deconstruction, and a reconstruction -- _tPeer review and publication : lessons for lawyers -- _tWhat's wrong with litigation-driven science? -- _tProving causation : the weight of combined evidence -- _tCorrelation and causation : the 'Bradford Hill Criteria' in epidemiological, legal, and epistemological perspective -- _tRisky business : statistical proof of specific causation -- _tNothing fancy : some simple truths about truth in the law.
520			_a"Is truth in the law just plain truth - or something sui generis? Is a trial a search for truth? Do adversarial procedures and exclusionary rules of evidence enable, or impede, the accurate determination of factual issues? Can degrees of proof be identified with mathematical probabilities? What role can statistical evidence properly play? How can courts best handle the scientific testimony on which cases sometimes turn? How are they to distinguish reliable scientific testimony from unreliable hokum? The dozen interdisciplinary essays collected here explore a whole nexus of such questions about science, proof, and truth in the law. With her characteristic clarity and verve, in these essays Haack brings her original and distinctive work in theory of knowledge and philosophy of science to bear on real-life legal issues. She includes detailed analyses of a wide variety of cases and lucid summaries of relevant scientific work, of the many roles of the scientific peer-review system, and of relevant legal developments"--
650		0	_aEvidence (Law) _98331
650		0	_aAdmissible evidence.
650		0	_aScience and law.
650		0	_aLaw _xPhilosophy.
650		7	_aLaw _xJurisprudence. _2bisacsh _99679
650		7	_aLaw _xPhilosophy. _2fast
650		7	_aAdmissible evidence. _2fast
650		7	_aEvidence (Law) _2fast _98331
650		7	_aScience and law. _2fast
651		7	_aUSA
830		0	_aLaw in context. _9798
942			_2lcc _cBOOK