The logic of uncertainty in law and life

IF 1.4 4区 社会学 Q1 LAW
K. Clermont
{"title":"The logic of uncertainty in law and life","authors":"K. Clermont","doi":"10.1093/lpr/mgaa012","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n My central interest is decision making in the presence of epistemic uncertainty. A method appropriate for both specialized inquiries and everyday reasoning is based on credal logic, which employs multivalent degrees of belief rather than traditional probability theory. It accounts for epistemic uncertainty as unallocated belief. It holds that, when facing real uncertainty, if a person believes a and believes b, then the person believes a and b together. This brand of multivalent logic underlies and justifies how legal decision makers and the rest of us find facts in a world infused with epistemic uncertainty. Indeed, this article closes by showing the equivalence of multivalent logic and inference to the best explanation. By demonstrating this similarity in reasoning, I aim to shore up our faith in the logic of traditional legal reasoning.","PeriodicalId":48724,"journal":{"name":"Law Probability & Risk","volume":"19 1","pages":"181-206"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2020-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1093/lpr/mgaa012","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Law Probability & Risk","FirstCategoryId":"100","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/lpr/mgaa012","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

My central interest is decision making in the presence of epistemic uncertainty. A method appropriate for both specialized inquiries and everyday reasoning is based on credal logic, which employs multivalent degrees of belief rather than traditional probability theory. It accounts for epistemic uncertainty as unallocated belief. It holds that, when facing real uncertainty, if a person believes a and believes b, then the person believes a and b together. This brand of multivalent logic underlies and justifies how legal decision makers and the rest of us find facts in a world infused with epistemic uncertainty. Indeed, this article closes by showing the equivalence of multivalent logic and inference to the best explanation. By demonstrating this similarity in reasoning, I aim to shore up our faith in the logic of traditional legal reasoning.
法律和生活中不确定性的逻辑
我的主要兴趣是在存在认知不确定性的情况下做出决策。一种既适用于专业探究又适用于日常推理的方法是基于可信度逻辑,该逻辑采用了多价置信度,而不是传统的概率论。它将认识上的不确定性解释为未分配的信念。它认为,当面临真正的不确定性时,如果一个人相信a并相信b,那么这个人就会同时相信a和b。这种多价逻辑是法律决策者和我们其他人如何在一个充满认知不确定性的世界中发现事实的基础和理由。事实上,本文最后展示了多价逻辑和推理对最佳解释的等价性。通过证明这种推理的相似性,我的目的是增强我们对传统法律推理逻辑的信心。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Law Probability & Risk
Law Probability & Risk MATHEMATICSSTATISTICS & PROBABILITY&-STATISTICS & PROBABILITY
CiteScore
2.10
自引率
28.60%
发文量
8
期刊介绍: Law, Probability & Risk is a fully refereed journal which publishes papers dealing with topics on the interface of law and probabilistic reasoning. These are interpreted broadly to include aspects relevant to the interpretation of scientific evidence, the assessment of uncertainty and the assessment of risk. The readership includes academic lawyers, mathematicians, statisticians and social scientists with interests in quantitative reasoning. The primary objective of the journal is to cover issues in law, which have a scientific element, with an emphasis on statistical and probabilistic issues and the assessment of risk. Examples of topics which may be covered include communications law, computers and the law, environmental law, law and medicine, regulatory law for science and technology, identification problems (such as DNA but including other materials), sampling issues (drugs, computer pornography, fraud), offender profiling, credit scoring, risk assessment, the role of statistics and probability in drafting legislation, the assessment of competing theories of evidence (possibly with a view to forming an optimal combination of them). In addition, a whole new area is emerging in the application of computers to medicine and other safety-critical areas. New legislation is required to define the responsibility of computer experts who develop software for tackling these safety-critical problems.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信