萨伯(Peter suber,1951- ),影响甚广的“开放近用运动”(open Access Movement,提倡在科研文献发表的同时,将电子文本在网上公布,以便读者免费取阅)的发起人。1973年毕业于美国叶尔汉姆学院,1978年获西北大学哲学博士学位。长期担任叶尔汉姆学院哲学教授,也讲授法律、计算机等其他课程。萨伯从事很多领域的社会活动,兼任SPARC(“学者出版与学术资源联盟”)高级研究员和耶鲁大学法学院信息社会项目访问学者等多项职务,还是两家网站(openaccessnews和ODenaccessletters)的博客作者。1991年出版专著《自我修正的悖论》。
Lon Fuller?s Case of the Speluncean Exp/ ~rers is the greatest fictitious legal case of all
time. That is saying a lot, for it has some stiff competition. While its competitors
may outdo it in courtroom drama, character development, or investigative
suspense, none matches it in legal depth or dialectical agility It shows not what
makes some lawyer?s caseload interesting, but what makes law itself interesting. It
would not make a good movie; it is all ?talking heads.? In fact, the parts that
would make a good movie - the events within the cave - are over and done with
by the time Fuller begins his piece. Moreover, these events are not depicted with
cinematic vivacity, but described after the fact with judicial precision and bland-
ness.
Fuller?s live Supreme Court justices tranquilly but rigorously show the
complexity of the facts and the flexibility of legal reasoning. The live opinions
focus on different factual details and legal precedents, and lit them into different
background structures of legal and political principle. By these means Fuller
crystallizes important conflicts of principle and illustrates the major schools of
legal philosophy in his day. Fuller?s case has been called ?a classic in jurispru-
dence,? ? a microcosm of this century?s debates,? and a ?breathtaking intellectual
accomplishment.?*
Although only half a century separates us from the date of Fuller?s essay, the
legal landscape has changed profoundly. I have written nine new judicial opin-
ions on his case, with roughly Fuller?s own objectives in view, hoping to explore
important issues of principle and in the process to bring the depiction of legal
philosophy up to date.
While I would like to depict the major schools of legal philosophy today,
giving each its due, there are a few obstacles that subtly constrain the project.
Suber, Peter. Case of the Speluncean Explorers: Nine New Opinions.
Florence, KY, USA: Routledge, 1998. p ix.
http://site.ebrary.com/lib/cityu/Doc?id=2003075&ppg=9
Copyright ? 1998. Routledge. All rights reserved.
Preface
Introduction 1
Pt. I Lon Fuller's Case of the Speluncean Explorers 5
Opinion of Chief Justice Truepenny 7
Opinion of Justice Foster 10
Opinion of Justice Tatting 15
Opinion of Justice Keen 20
Opinion of Justice Handy 25
Opinion of Justice Tatting 31
Postscript 32
Pt. II Nine New Opinions 33
Opinion of Chief Justice Burnham 35
Opinion of Justice Springham 45
Opinion of Justice Tally 57
Opinion of Justice Hellen 64
Opinion of Justice Trumpet 73
Opinion of Justice Goad 79
Opinion of Justice Frank 89
Opinion of Justice Reckon 91
Opinion of Justice Bond 99
Index 108
我试图用抬杠的方式把14个法官的意见展现出来,只说有罪无罪(但其实持同一方意见的法官之间,给出的理由也大相径庭,我尽量模糊掉这一部分),写到后面我自己都要精神分裂了。至于结果有罪无罪,书中最后是在意见全部持平的情况下判处死刑的,而你怎样认为就是另外一回事了。 ...
评分首先,当面对着一个如此复杂和矛盾的案件时,我完全同意弗兰克法官的观点,即所有依靠不甚精确甚至自相矛盾的法律条文来断定被告有罪或无罪的的判决结果统统都不过是法律语言包装之下的个人意见。如果单单在法理上就既有诸如“故意杀人”和“有意杀人”此类的争执,又有“免责...
评分 评分法理学/刑法/逻辑训练之最佳入门or精研读本推荐!
评分我判有罪
评分2012年02月27日——2012年03月11日
评分案件不算新奇了,探讨的法理学问题倒是不错
评分引一段书友评论——如果有一天我犯了什么罪……这么讲不恰当,换个说法,如果有一天我成为某件刑事案的嫌疑人或被告人,我希望我的动机不是“试图以激烈手段为自己或他人寻求公正”,我宁愿作为一个职业罪犯被审判。如果我不幸被杀,我希望凶手是个体的人,而非公器,平等或意外地丧生于个人之手,我接
本站所有内容均为互联网搜索引擎提供的公开搜索信息,本站不存储任何数据与内容,任何内容与数据均与本站无关,如有需要请联系相关搜索引擎包括但不限于百度,google,bing,sogou 等
© 2025 book.quotespace.org All Rights Reserved. 小美书屋 版权所有