Abstract

http://ssrn.com/abstract=805049
 


 



'Mere' Rhetoric About Common Ground and Different Perspectives: A Comment on Twining's 'Evidence as a Multi-disciplinary Subject'


Eileen A. Scallen


UCLA School of Law


Law, Probability and Risk, Vol. 2, pp. 109-116, June 2003

Abstract:     
Scallen responds to Twining's argument that Evidence is a multi-disciplinary subject that is inferential in nature. She agrees that recognizing the multidisciplinary nature of Evidence is valuable in that it returns it to its rightful place as fundamental to the art of advocacy - an activity broader than its legal connotations. Scallen argues, however, that while Twining may be correct that all disciplines employ inferential reasoning of some sort, Evidence scholars have more to gain from learning and appreciating the differences in the 'questions of evidence' in other disciplines than from fitting the disciplines into the same category of inferential reasoning.

Accepted Paper Series





Not Available For Download

Date posted: February 29, 2008  

Suggested Citation

Scallen, Eileen A., 'Mere' Rhetoric About Common Ground and Different Perspectives: A Comment on Twining's 'Evidence as a Multi-disciplinary Subject'. Law, Probability and Risk, Vol. 2, pp. 109-116, June 2003. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=805049

Contact Information

Eileen A. Scallen (Contact Author)
UCLA School of Law ( email )
385 Charles E. Young Dr. East
Room 1242
Los Angeles, CA 90095-1476
United States
(310) 206-0592 (Phone)
Feedback to SSRN


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 533

© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo3 in 0.329 seconds