Truth and Justice, Inquiry and Advocacy, Science and Law

$48.00 plus tax (Refund Policy)

Download / Buy Article:

Abstract:

Abstract.

There is tension between the adversarialism of the U.S. legal culture and the investigative procedures of the sciences, and between the law's concern for finality and the open-ended fallibilism of science. A long history of attempts to domesticate scientific testimony by legal rules of admissibility has left federal judges with broad screening responsibilities; recent adaptations of adversarialism in the form of court-appointed experts have been criticized as “inquisitorial,” even “undemocratic.” In exploring their benefits and disadvantages, it would make sense to look to the experience of other legal systems.

Document Type: Research Article

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.0952-1917.2004.00252.x

Affiliations: University of Miami, Department of Philosophy, USA

Publication date: March 1, 2004

Related content

Tools

Favourites

Share Content

Access Key

Free Content
Free content
New Content
New content
Open Access Content
Open access content
Subscribed Content
Subscribed content
Free Trial Content
Free trial content
Cookie Policy
X
Cookie Policy
ingentaconnect website makes use of cookies so as to keep track of data that you have filled in. I am Happy with this Find out more