Topic
Doctrine
About: Doctrine is a research topic. Over the lifetime, 21901 publications have been published within this topic receiving 204282 citations.
Papers published on a yearly basis
Papers
More filters
TL;DR: This article argues, by example, for neuroethics as a new way of doing ethics, arguing that experimental results suggest that appeal to the doctrine of double effect might be question-begging and that the data suggest that the authors regard some effects as merely foreseen only because they are regarded as permissible.
Abstract: The aim of this article is to argue, by example, for neuroethics as a new way of doing ethics. Rather than simply giving us a new subject matter—the ethical issues arising from neuroscience—to attend to, neuroethics offers us the opportunity to refine the tools we use. Ethicists often need to appeal to the intuitions provoked by consideration of cases to evaluate the permissibility of types of actions; data from the sciences of the mind give us reason to believe that some of these intuitions are less reliable than others. I focus on the doctrine of double effect to illustrate my case, arguing that experimental results suggest that appeal to it might be question-begging. The doctrine of double effect is supposed to show that there is a moral difference between effects that are brought about intentionally and those that are merely foreseen; I argue that the data suggest that we regard some effects as merely foreseen only because we regard bringing them about as permissible. Appeal to the doctrine of double ...
68 citations
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors combine simple formal analysis of the tradeoffs involved in interpretation with applications to the principal doctrines of contract interpretation, including the four corners rule, mutual mistake, contra proferentum, and what I call the (informal but very important) rule of extrinsic nonevidence.
Abstract: Contract interpretation is an understudied topic in the economic analysis of contract law. This paper combines simple formal analysis of the tradeoffs involved in interpretation with applications to the principal doctrines of contract interpretation, including the four corners rule, mutual mistake, contra proferentum, and what I call the (informal but very important) rule of extrinsic nonevidence. Gap filling is distinguished, and the relativity of interpretive doctrine to the interpretive medium - jurors, arbitrators, and judges in different kinds of judicial system - is emphasized.
68 citations
TL;DR: In a remarkably fresh and historically grounded reinterpretation of the American Constitution, William Nelson argues that the fourteenth amendment was written to affirm the general public's long-standing rhetorical commitment to the principles of equality and individual rights on the one hand, and to the principle of local self-rule on the other as mentioned in this paper.
Abstract: In a remarkably fresh and historically grounded reinterpretation of the American Constitution, William Nelson argues that the fourteenth amendment was written to affirm the general public's long-standing rhetorical commitment to the principles of equality and individual rights on the one hand, and to the principle of local self-rule on the other.
68 citations