{"title":"侵权行为法的新哲学基础?","authors":"Avihay Dorfman","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2555525","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this critical piece I take stock of current understandings of five basic distinctions in the theoretical study of tort law: First, a meta-theoretical distinction between the law’s self-presentation and a commitment to epiphenomenalism; second, between the formal and the substantive theory of the morality of tort law; third, between corrective and distributive justice; fourth, between ideal and non-ideal tort theory; and finally, between culpability and justice (or equality).","PeriodicalId":142986,"journal":{"name":"Law & Society: Private Law eJournal","volume":"69 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-01-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"New Philosophical Foundations of Tort Law?\",\"authors\":\"Avihay Dorfman\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.2555525\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In this critical piece I take stock of current understandings of five basic distinctions in the theoretical study of tort law: First, a meta-theoretical distinction between the law’s self-presentation and a commitment to epiphenomenalism; second, between the formal and the substantive theory of the morality of tort law; third, between corrective and distributive justice; fourth, between ideal and non-ideal tort theory; and finally, between culpability and justice (or equality).\",\"PeriodicalId\":142986,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Law & Society: Private Law eJournal\",\"volume\":\"69 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2015-01-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Law & Society: Private Law eJournal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2555525\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Law & Society: Private Law eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2555525","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
In this critical piece I take stock of current understandings of five basic distinctions in the theoretical study of tort law: First, a meta-theoretical distinction between the law’s self-presentation and a commitment to epiphenomenalism; second, between the formal and the substantive theory of the morality of tort law; third, between corrective and distributive justice; fourth, between ideal and non-ideal tort theory; and finally, between culpability and justice (or equality).
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
