Proof paradoxes and normic support: Socializing or relativizing?

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

3 Scopus citations

Abstract

Smith (2018) argues that, unlike other forms of evidence, naked statistical evidence fails to satisfy normic support. This is his solution to the puzzles of statistical evidence in legal proof. This paper focuses on Smith’s claim that DNA evidence in cold-hit cases does not satisfy normic support. I argue that if this claim is correct, virtually no other form of evidence used at trial can satisfy normic support. This is troublesome. I discuss a few ways in which Smith can respond.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1269-1285
Number of pages17
JournalMind
Volume129
Issue number516
DOIs
StatePublished - Oct 1 2019
Externally publishedYes

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Philosophy

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Proof paradoxes and normic support: Socializing or relativizing?'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this