Does Legal Epistemology Rest on a Mistake? On Fetishism, Two-Tier System Design, and Conscientious Fact-Finding

Legal epistemology seems to be exploding. More and more philosophers seem taking an interest in the theory of evidence law, bring along with them legal freshest news from abstract study . This is understandable, course: The law general, particular, employing same natural-language terms epistemologists are (or at least supposed be) interested (“knew or should have known”, “reasonable doubt”, “evidence”, “presumption” (of innocence), so on) . In this paper we argue that a large part project based on mistake, roughly analogous mistake involved thinking studies intelligence as relevant understanding military intelligence. With qualifications shortly emerge, not, think, intrinsically directly normative theory, least, is, long perspective designing regime. When it comes conscientious fact-finder, things may – we’re not sure about importantly different.