Naturalized Epistemology and the Law of Evidence: Methodological Reflections

This paper discusses Ronald Allen’s article, Naturalized Epistemology and the Law of Evidence Revisited, and reflects on how epistemology can contribute to our understanding of the evidentiary proof process. I first situate Allen’s critique of recent philosophical scholarship, distinguishing between...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Michael S. Pardo
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Universitat de Girona. Cátedra de Cultura Jurídica 2021-01-01
Series:Quaestio Facti
Subjects:
Online Access:https://revistes.udg.edu/quaestio-facti/article/view/22484
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1849396903064633344
author Michael S. Pardo
author_facet Michael S. Pardo
author_sort Michael S. Pardo
collection DOAJ
description This paper discusses Ronald Allen’s article, Naturalized Epistemology and the Law of Evidence Revisited, and reflects on how epistemology can contribute to our understanding of the evidentiary proof process. I first situate Allen’s critique of recent philosophical scholarship, distinguishing between general theoretical accounts of proof (including the theory that Allen and I have defended), on one hand, and the applications of specific epistemological concepts or issues to law, on the other. I then present a methodological picture that diverges in some respects from the one that emerges from Allen’s critique. In discussing this alternative methodological picture, I explain how epistemology can contribute to legal evidence and proof while avoiding the problems that Allen identifies.
format Article
id doaj-art-abe9a96ceaa341d69b44827f85c72d51
institution Kabale University
issn 2660-4515
2604-6202
language English
publishDate 2021-01-01
publisher Universitat de Girona. Cátedra de Cultura Jurídica
record_format Article
series Quaestio Facti
spelling doaj-art-abe9a96ceaa341d69b44827f85c72d512025-08-20T03:39:13ZengUniversitat de Girona. Cátedra de Cultura JurídicaQuaestio Facti2660-45152604-62022021-01-01210.33115/udg_bib/qf.i2.2248422425Naturalized Epistemology and the Law of Evidence: Methodological ReflectionsMichael S. PardoThis paper discusses Ronald Allen’s article, Naturalized Epistemology and the Law of Evidence Revisited, and reflects on how epistemology can contribute to our understanding of the evidentiary proof process. I first situate Allen’s critique of recent philosophical scholarship, distinguishing between general theoretical accounts of proof (including the theory that Allen and I have defended), on one hand, and the applications of specific epistemological concepts or issues to law, on the other. I then present a methodological picture that diverges in some respects from the one that emerges from Allen’s critique. In discussing this alternative methodological picture, I explain how epistemology can contribute to legal evidence and proof while avoiding the problems that Allen identifies.https://revistes.udg.edu/quaestio-facti/article/view/22484Epistemologylegal proofrelative plausibilitystatistical evidencesafetysensitivity
spellingShingle Michael S. Pardo
Naturalized Epistemology and the Law of Evidence: Methodological Reflections
Quaestio Facti
Epistemology
legal proof
relative plausibility
statistical evidence
safety
sensitivity
title Naturalized Epistemology and the Law of Evidence: Methodological Reflections
title_full Naturalized Epistemology and the Law of Evidence: Methodological Reflections
title_fullStr Naturalized Epistemology and the Law of Evidence: Methodological Reflections
title_full_unstemmed Naturalized Epistemology and the Law of Evidence: Methodological Reflections
title_short Naturalized Epistemology and the Law of Evidence: Methodological Reflections
title_sort naturalized epistemology and the law of evidence methodological reflections
topic Epistemology
legal proof
relative plausibility
statistical evidence
safety
sensitivity
url https://revistes.udg.edu/quaestio-facti/article/view/22484
work_keys_str_mv AT michaelspardo naturalizedepistemologyandthelawofevidencemethodologicalreflections