内容简介 · · · · · ·
Lon Fuller?s Case of the Speluncean Exp/ ~rers is the greatest fictitious legal case of all
time. That is saying a lot, for it has some stiff competition. While its competitors
may outdo it in courtroom drama, character development, or investigative
suspense, none matches it in legal depth or dialectical agility It shows not what
makes some lawyer?s caseload interesting, but wh...
Lon Fuller?s Case of the Speluncean Exp/ ~rers is the greatest fictitious legal case of all
time. That is saying a lot, for it has some stiff competition. While its competitors
may outdo it in courtroom drama, character development, or investigative
suspense, none matches it in legal depth or dialectical agility It shows not what
makes some lawyer?s caseload interesting, but what makes law itself interesting. It
would not make a good movie; it is all ?talking heads.? In fact, the parts that
would make a good movie - the events within the cave - are over and done with
by the time Fuller begins his piece. Moreover, these events are not depicted with
cinematic vivacity, but described after the fact with judicial precision and bland-
ness.
Fuller?s live Supreme Court justices tranquilly but rigorously show the
complexity of the facts and the flexibility of legal reasoning. The live opinions
focus on different factual details and legal precedents, and lit them into different
background structures of legal and political principle. By these means Fuller
crystallizes important conflicts of principle and illustrates the major schools of
legal philosophy in his day. Fuller?s case has been called ?a classic in jurispru-
dence,? ? a microcosm of this century?s debates,? and a ?breathtaking intellectual
accomplishment.?*
Although only half a century separates us from the date of Fuller?s essay, the
legal landscape has changed profoundly. I have written nine new judicial opin-
ions on his case, with roughly Fuller?s own objectives in view, hoping to explore
important issues of principle and in the process to bring the depiction of legal
philosophy up to date.
While I would like to depict the major schools of legal philosophy today,
giving each its due, there are a few obstacles that subtly constrain the project.
Suber, Peter. Case of the Speluncean Explorers: Nine New Opinions.
Florence, KY, USA: Routledge, 1998. p ix.
http://site.ebrary.com/lib/cityu/Doc?id=2003075&ppg=9
Copyright ? 1998. Routledge. All rights reserved.
Preface
Introduction 1
Pt. I Lon Fuller's Case of the Speluncean Explorers 5
Opinion of Chief Justice Truepenny 7
Opinion of Justice Foster 10
Opinion of Justice Tatting 15
Opinion of Justice Keen 20
Opinion of Justice Handy 25
Opinion of Justice Tatting 31
Postscript 32
Pt. II Nine New Opinions 33
Opinion of Chief Justice Burnham 35
Opinion of Justice Springham 45
Opinion of Justice Tally 57
Opinion of Justice Hellen 64
Opinion of Justice Trumpet 73
Opinion of Justice Goad 79
Opinion of Justice Frank 89
Opinion of Justice Reckon 91
Opinion of Justice Bond 99
Index 108
作者简介 · · · · · ·
萨伯(Peter suber,1951- ),影响甚广的“开放近用运动”(open Access Movement,提倡在科研文献发表的同时,将电子文本在网上公布,以便读者免费取阅)的发起人。1973年毕业于美国叶尔汉姆学院,1978年获西北大学哲学博士学位。长期担任叶尔汉姆学院哲学教授,也讲授法律、计算机等其他课程。萨伯从事很多领域的社会活动,兼任SPARC(“学者出版与学术资源联盟”)高级研究员和耶鲁大学法学院信息社会项目访问学者等多项职务,还是两家网站(openaccessnews和ODenaccessletters)的博客作者。1991年出版专著《自我修正的悖论》。
原文摘录 · · · · · · ( 全部 )
-
人类生存的通常条件使我们倾向于把人类生活当成绝对的价值,在任何情况下都不容牺牲。这一观点有许多虚伪的成分,即便是适用到日常的社会关系中。我们面前的这个案子就能证明这个道理。在移开洞口岩石的过程中,十个工作人员牺牲了。指挥救援工作的工程师和政府官员难道不知道工作人员的作业有危险,会严重威胁工作人员的安全吗?如果说为了营救被困的五个探险者,牺牲这十个人的性命是合适的,为什么我们要说这些探险者达成牺牲一个人以挽救四个人的安排是错误的呢? 我们所规划的每一条高速公路、每一个隧道、每一座建筑,在建造过程中都可能危及生命安全。把这些工程汇总起来,我们可以大致计算出建设这些工程项目将会牺牲多少人的性命。统计学家可以告诉你建造一千英里的四车道的混凝土高速公路平均需要付出的生命。然而,我们故意或心照不宣地承受和付出这些代价,因为假设生者所获得的价值远远超过这些损失。如果可以用此来评价在地面上正常运转的社会,我们如何评价被告和他们的伙伴威特莫尔在绝境之中假定的人类生命的绝对价值? (查看原文) —— 引自第25页 -
我们所规划的每一条高速公路、每一条隧道、每一座建筑,在建造过程中都可能危及建造者的生命安全。把这些工程汇总起来,我们可以大致计算出建设这些工程项目将会牺牲多少人的性命。统计学家可以告诉你建造一千英里的四车道的混凝土高速公路平均需要付出的生命。然而,我们故意或心照不宣地承受和付出这些代价,因为假设生者所获得的价值远远超过这些损失。 (查看原文) —— 引自章节:观点二 探究立法精神
> 全部原文摘录
喜欢读"洞穴奇案的十四種判決"的人也喜欢 · · · · · ·
洞穴奇案的十四種判決的书评 · · · · · · ( 全部 453 条 )

十三级反转,跟着大法官们学有理有据地怼人




论坛 · · · · · ·
在这本书的论坛里发言这本书的其他版本 · · · · · · ( 全部9 )
-
九州出版社 (2020)8.8分 6246人读过
-
Routledge (1998)9.6分 114人读过
-
生活·读书·新知三联书店 (2009)9.0分 11634人读过
-
生活·读书·新知三联书店 (2012)8.9分 4750人读过
以下书单推荐 · · · · · · ( 全部 )
- 闲着没事读读书(四) (鹿小羽)
- 个人研习——友人读书荐书 (漫艺淑)
- <读书>『壬辰年』购书单 (混涅洁)
- 书单|给安安的 (Sixmo)
- 从梁文道开始读 (混涅洁)
谁读这本书? · · · · · ·
二手市场
· · · · · ·
- 在豆瓣转让 有201人想读,手里有一本闲着?
订阅关于洞穴奇案的十四種判決的评论:
feed: rss 2.0
0 有用 JumpSan 2022-04-22 17:27:42
虽然是英美法体系但是其中提供的法律与道德的论证思考同样适用于每一个法治社会。(ps.好喜欢大法官写的判决书啊!)
0 有用 薛诗汉 2012-03-12 14:02:35
2012年02月27日——2012年03月11日
0 有用 easonwang23 2014-07-11 16:37:20
案件不算新奇了,探讨的法理学问题倒是不错
0 有用 安东妮 2007-09-23 11:43:47
但外行女心中仍有个疑问,就是撇开杀人这一事实和所有细节不说,人吃人这个情节,在人伦上难道不更摇摇欲坠?
0 有用 映虚 2012-04-27 16:55:54
极力推荐