Measuring justice

IF 0.7 2区 社会学 Q2 LAW International Journal of Evidence & Proof Pub Date : 2019-06-11 DOI:10.1177/1365712719851136
William Cullerne Bown
{"title":"Measuring justice","authors":"William Cullerne Bown","doi":"10.1177/1365712719851136","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The possibility of measuring the success of the criminal justice system in distinguishing the guilty from the innocent is often dismissed as impossible or at least impractical. Here I claim to demonstrate that such epistemic measurement would only be difficult. All measurement consists of two steps, the acquisition of observations and their processing through a computational framework. The law has lacked both, but I have recently put forward a computational framework and here I set out how the necessary observations can be obtained. This completes the conceptual foundations necessary for the development of jurisprudence as a social science, for policymaking in the law that is rooted in rational concern for epistemic outcomes, and for us to fulfil the modern, trustworthy and democratic promise that our forebears found in Blackstone’s ratio.","PeriodicalId":54168,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Evidence & Proof","volume":"23 1","pages":"399 - 421"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2019-06-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1365712719851136","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Evidence & Proof","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1365712719851136","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

The possibility of measuring the success of the criminal justice system in distinguishing the guilty from the innocent is often dismissed as impossible or at least impractical. Here I claim to demonstrate that such epistemic measurement would only be difficult. All measurement consists of two steps, the acquisition of observations and their processing through a computational framework. The law has lacked both, but I have recently put forward a computational framework and here I set out how the necessary observations can be obtained. This completes the conceptual foundations necessary for the development of jurisprudence as a social science, for policymaking in the law that is rooted in rational concern for epistemic outcomes, and for us to fulfil the modern, trustworthy and democratic promise that our forebears found in Blackstone’s ratio.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
测量正义
衡量刑事司法系统在区分有罪与无罪方面是否成功的可能性往往被认为是不可能的,或者至少是不切实际的。在这里,我声称要证明这样的认知测量只会很困难。所有测量都包括两个步骤,即获取观测值和通过计算框架进行处理。该定律两者都缺乏,但我最近提出了一个计算框架,并在这里阐述了如何获得必要的观测值。这为法学作为一门社会科学的发展奠定了必要的概念基础,为植根于对认识结果的理性关注的法律政策制定奠定了基础,也为我们实现祖先在黑石比率中发现的现代、值得信赖和民主的承诺奠定了基础。
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 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
20.00%
发文量
15
期刊最新文献
Preponderance, proportionality, stepwise liability Stepwise liability: Between the preponderance rule and proportional liability The skewing effect of outcome evidence The economic case for conviction multiplicity What matters for assessing insider witnesses? Results of an experimental vignette study
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1