Atjaunināt sīkdatņu piekrišanu

Strategic Indeterminacy in the Law [Hardback]

(Researcher and Trainer, DebateLab at Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT) and Institute of Argumentation Competence in Berlin)
  • Formāts: Hardback, 352 pages, height x width x depth: 236x157x33 mm, weight: 658 g
  • Sērija : Oxford Studies in Language and Law
  • Izdošanas datums: 18-Jul-2019
  • Izdevniecība: Oxford University Press Inc
  • ISBN-10: 0190923695
  • ISBN-13: 9780190923693
Citas grāmatas par šo tēmu:
  • Hardback
  • Cena: 130,14 €
  • Grāmatu piegādes laiks ir 3-4 nedēļas, ja grāmata ir uz vietas izdevniecības noliktavā. Ja izdevējam nepieciešams publicēt jaunu tirāžu, grāmatas piegāde var aizkavēties.
  • Daudzums:
  • Ielikt grozā
  • Piegādes laiks - 4-6 nedēļas
  • Pievienot vēlmju sarakstam
  • Formāts: Hardback, 352 pages, height x width x depth: 236x157x33 mm, weight: 658 g
  • Sērija : Oxford Studies in Language and Law
  • Izdošanas datums: 18-Jul-2019
  • Izdevniecība: Oxford University Press Inc
  • ISBN-10: 0190923695
  • ISBN-13: 9780190923693
Citas grāmatas par šo tēmu:
Though indeterminacy in legal texts is pervasive, there is a widespread misunderstanding about what indeterminacy is, particularly as it pertains to law. Legal texts present unique challenges insofar as they address a heterogeneous audience, are applied in a variety of unforeseeable circumstances and must, at the same time, lay down clear and unambiguous standards. Sometimes they fail to do so, however, either by accident or by intention. While many have claimed that indeterminacy facilitates flexibility and can be strategically used, few have recognized that there are more forms of indeterminacy than vagueness and ambiguity. A comprehensive account of legal indeterminacy is thus called for.

David Lanius here answers that call and in so doing, addresses three central questions about the role of indeterminacy in the law. First, what are the sources of indeterminacy in law? Second, what effects do the different forms of indeterminacy have? Third, how can and should these forms be intentionally used? Based on a thorough examination of the advantages and disadvantages of the different forms of indeterminacy in the wording of laws, contracts, and verdicts, Lanius argues for the claim that semantic vagueness is less relevant than commonly supposed in the debate, while other forms of indeterminacy (in particular, polysemy and standard-relativity) are mistakenly underrated or even ignored. This misconception is due to a systematic confusion between semantic vagueness and these other forms of indeterminacy. Once it is resolved, the value and functions of linguistic indeterminacy in the law can be clearly shown.

Recenzijas

a work of remarkable scholarship ... for scholars interested in the relation between law and language, Strategic Indeterminacy in the Law is required reading. * Quentin Du Plessis, Journal of Applied Philosophy * Strategic Indeterminacy in the Law is a careful and comprehensive guide to the many kinds of indeterminacy in the law, how law responds to indeterminacy, and why courts and lawmakers sometimes intentionally seek indeterminacy. It will be an important resource forcourts and scholars alike * Brian Bix, Frederick W. Thomas, Professor of Law and Philosophy, University of Minnesota * A philosophically sophisticated work that breaks new ground in our understanding of indeterminacy in law. This book should be read by lawyers and legal philosophers alike. It is as accessible as it is insightful * Dennis Patterson, Board of Governors Professor of Law and Philosophy, Rutgers University and Surrey Law School * David Lanius's Strategic Indeterminacy in the Law contains a terrifically clear and rigorous discussion of indeterminacy and its relevance to law. Lanius offers a systematic, clarificatory overview of the relevant fundamental notions, persuasively examines existing arguments, and provides interesting positive arguments for the strategic value of legal indeterminacy * Hrafn Asgeirsson, Associate Professor of Philosophy and Law, University of Surrey *

List of Figures and Tables
x
List of Definitions
xi
List of Cases
xiv
Preface xvi
Introduction 1(3)
1 Forms of Indeterminancy
4(58)
1.1 Linguistic Indeterminacy and Unclarity
6(7)
1.2 Ambiguity
13(8)
1.2.1 Syntactic Ambiguity
14(2)
1.2.2 Lexical Ambiguity
16(2)
1.2.3 Polysemy
18(3)
1.3 Semantic Vagueness
21(17)
1.3.1 Gradual Vagueness
27(5)
1.3.2 Multi-dimensional Vagueness
32(5)
1.3.3 Open Texture
37(1)
1.4 Conversational Vagueness
38(6)
1.5 Pragmatic Indeterminacy
44(8)
1.5.1 Implicature Indeterminacy
45(2)
1.5.2 Speech Act Ambiguity
47(1)
1.5.3 Presupposition Indeterminacy
48(1)
1.5.4 Impliciture Indeterminacy
49(3)
1.6 Context Determination and Standard-Relativity
52(7)
1.7 Summary
59(3)
2 Language and the Law
62(60)
2.1 Legal Language
64(5)
2.2 Legal Performatives
69(12)
2.2.1 Laws
71(4)
2.2.2 Verdicts
75(3)
2.2.3 Contracts
78(3)
2.3 Interpretation and the Law
81(21)
2.3.1 Three Choices
83(3)
2.3.2 Theories of Legal Interpretation
86(5)
2.3.3 Interpretation and Construction
91(3)
2.3.4 Legal Indeterminacy
94(8)
2.4 The Content of the Law
102(19)
2.4.1 Linguistic Content
103(8)
2.4.2 CTL on Trial
111(4)
2.4.3 Theoretical Disagreement in Practice
115(6)
2.5 Summary
121(1)
3 Indeterminacy In the Law
122(47)
3.1 Ambiguity in the Law
123(6)
3.2 Semantic Vagueness in the Law
129(18)
3.2.1 Solan on Definitions and Prototypes
131(5)
3.2.2 Endicott on Extravagant Vagueness
136(7)
3.2.3 Sandwiches and Burritos
143(4)
3.3 Conversational Vagueness in the Law
147(5)
3.4 Pragmatic Indeterminacy in the Law
152(16)
3.5 Summary
168(1)
4 Functions of Indeterminacy
169(47)
4.1 Signaling Games
170(3)
4.2 Indeterminacy in Signaling Games
173(3)
4.3 The Disutility of Indeterminacy
176(19)
4.3.1 Lipman's Proof
177(4)
4.3.2 The Value of Semantic Vagueness
181(12)
4.3.3 Indeterminacy and Cooperation
193(2)
4.4 Strategies of Indeterminacy
195(17)
4.4.1 Strategies of Semantic Vagueness
197(4)
4.4.2 Strategies of Conversational Vagueness
201(2)
4.4.3 Strategies of Ambiguity
203(6)
4.4.4 Strategies of Pragmatic Indeterminacy
209(3)
4.5 Comparison of the Strategies
212(3)
4.6 Summary
215(1)
5 Strategic Indeterminacy in the Law
216(68)
5.1 Delegating Power in Laws
217(27)
5.1.1 Conflict and Compromise
219(5)
5.1.2 An Example: Sherman and Clayton
224(5)
5.1.3 Informational Asymmetry
229(5)
5.1.4 Double-Talk and Compliance
234(7)
5.1.5 Forms of Indeterminacy Revisited
241(3)
5.2 Saving Face in Verdicts
244(18)
5.2.1 An Example: With All Deliberate Speed
245(9)
5.2.2 Sorites Reasoning
254(3)
5.2.3 Deniability and Saving Face
257(5)
5.3 Exploiting Unawareness in Contracts
262(20)
5.3.1 An Example: Vehicles
265(3)
5.3.2 Costs
268(6)
5.3.3 Incentives
274(4)
5.3.4 Unawareness
278(4)
5.4 Summary
282(2)
Summary and Conclusion
284(5)
Appendix
289(14)
A.1 Strategies of Semantic Vagueness
289(3)
A.2 Strategies of Conversational Vagueness
292(1)
A.3 Strategies of Ambiguity
293(3)
A.4 The Strategy of Saving Face in Verdicts
296(2)
A.5 The Strategy of Exploiting Unawareness in Contracts
298(5)
Bibliography 303(24)
Index 327
David Lanius is Post-Doctoral Researcher at DebateLab of Karlsruhe Institute of Technology. He works on strategic indeterminacy in the law and politics, constructive discourse, argument analysis, fake news, and populism.