DIGESTIVE JURISPRUDENCE RESTATED: ON BREAKFAST AND DIGESTION AS BIAS-AROUSERS

“Digestive Jurisprudence” is the view that judicial decisions depend on what judges had for breakfast. The view is usually associated with Frank’s version of Legal Realism. The paper shows that, disputable as it is, that view comes from the philosophical background of Peirce’s pragmatism and the leg...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Anali Pravnog fakulteta u Beogradu 2023-01, Vol.71 (3), p.417-439
1. Verfasser: Tuzet, Giovanni
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:“Digestive Jurisprudence” is the view that judicial decisions depend on what judges had for breakfast. The view is usually associated with Frank’s version of Legal Realism. The paper shows that, disputable as it is, that view comes from the philosophical background of Peirce’s pragmatism and the legal background of Holmes’ prediction theory. Peirce’s pragmatism was an account of concepts in terms of their predictable consequences. Holmes’ prediction theory was an account of law in terms of predictions of what judges will do. And Legal Realism focused on judicial behavior as determined by various factors including, in its most extreme and provocative version, breakfast quality and digestive processes. The paper does not ascertain whether the digestive view is true (to some extent); rather, it makes the working hypothesis that breakfast quality, or digestion quality, is not a sufficient condition of a certain outcome but, most likely, a bias-arouser.
ISSN:0003-2565
2406-2693
DOI:10.51204/Anali_PFBU_23301A