Posted: 29 Feb 2008
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.
Suggested Citation: 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: https://ssrn.com/abstract=805049