Warrant, Causation, and the Atomism of Evidence Law

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

2 Scopus citations

Abstract

The epistemological analysis offered in this paper reveals that a combination of pieces of evidence, none of them sufficient by itself to warrant a causal conclusion to the legally required degree of proof, may do so jointly. The legal analysis offered here, interlocking with this, reveals that Daubert's requirement that courts screen each item of scientific expert testimony for reliability can actually impede the process of arriving at the conclusion most warranted by the evidence proffered.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)253-266
Number of pages14
JournalEpisteme
Volume5
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - 2008

    Fingerprint

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • History and Philosophy of Science

Cite this