Scientific Proof versus Legal Proof: Ruminations about Mathematical and Statistical Reasoning in Legal Factfinding
Scientists try to find out the truth about our world. Judges in a court of law try to find out the truth about the target events in the indictment. What are the similarities, and what are the differences, in the procedures that govern the search for truth in these two systems? In particular, why are quantitative tools the hallmark of science, whereas in courts they are rarely used, and when used, are prone to error?
Year of publication: |
2010-05
|
---|---|
Authors: | Bar-Hillel, Maya |
Institutions: | Center for the Study of Rationality, Hebrew University of Jerusalem |
Saved in:
freely available
Saved in favorites
Similar items by person
-
We sing the praise of good displays: How gamblers bet in casino roulette
Bar-Hillel, Maya, (2011)
-
Location, Location, Location: Position Effects in Choice Among Simultaneously Presented Options
Bar-Hillel, Maya, (2011)
-
Behavioral economics and the law (in Hebrew)
Bar-Hillel, Maya, (2011)
- More ...