Abstract

http://ssrn.com/abstract=1723273
 
 

Footnotes (21)



 


 



The Limits of Epistemic Legalism: A Reply


Adrian Vermeule


Harvard Law School

December 25, 2009

Jerusalem Review of Legal Studies, Vol. 2, 2010
Harvard Public Law Working Paper No. 10-48

Abstract:     
The Jerusalem Review of Legal Studies has published a symposium on Law and the Limits of Reason (2009). In this reply to the commentators, I attempt to go beyond the book to clarify several critical issues. One is whether epistemic legalism, the book’s main target, is itself a theory of judicial legitimacy; I claim that it is. Another is the distinction between comparing the epistemic capacities of legislators and judges, on the one hand, and comparing the epistemic capacities of legislatures and courts, on the other. The first compares individuals, while the second compares groups. Conflating these two very different comparisons produces aggregation fallacies and analytic mistakes.

Accepted Paper Series


Not Available For Download

Date posted: December 11, 2010 ; Last revised: March 20, 2012

Suggested Citation

Vermeule, Adrian, The Limits of Epistemic Legalism: A Reply (December 25, 2009). Jerusalem Review of Legal Studies, Vol. 2, 2010; Harvard Public Law Working Paper No. 10-48. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1723273

Contact Information

Adrian Vermeule (Contact Author)
Harvard Law School ( email )
1525 Massachusetts
Griswold 500
Cambridge, MA 02138
United States
Feedback to SSRN


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 1,196

© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo2 in 0.235 seconds