Lecture 1. Introduction: Empiricism in the Anglo-American Tradition Flashcards
What is the primary focus of rules of evidence in Anglo-American tradition?
The primary focus is on jury trials. Without a jury, there are no rules of evidence, as they are designed to guide jurors in making decisions based on evidence presented during trials.
How did the jury system evolve in the 1700s?
In the 1700s, the jury system shifted from relying on personal knowledge of jurors (neighbors and the accused) to decisions based on evidence and judicial instructions on reasoning.
Why were rules of evidence developed in the Anglo-American legal system?
They were developed because jurors needed guidance from judges on how to reason with evidence, as they were not personally knowledgeable about the case.
How did the role of judges change in the 1700s regarding evidence?
Judges were responsible for instructing juries on how to reason with evidence, as juries no longer relied on personal experiences but on instructions about how to reach a conclusion based on evidence.
How did the development of common law relate to evidence rules?
Common law evolved over centuries without a written constitution, with judges making decisions based on principles and facts. Evidence rules were influenced by other fields like philosophy, theology, and the scientific method.
What does “moral certainty” mean in terms of evidence?
Moral certainty refers to the belief that something is true because it aligns with the general experience and consensus of people over time, not necessarily absolute certainty.
What impact did the Protestant Reformation have on English evidence rules?
Protestant theology, particularly in England, promoted rational empirical conclusions, influencing how evidence was assessed in legal cases. Knowledge was no longer seen as absolute but as sufficiently true for practical purposes.
What were the three kinds of knowledge discussed in the 17th century?
Physical knowledge (e.g., temperature), mathematical knowledge (e.g., logic), and moral knowledge (e.g., testimony about right and wrong).
How did John Locke contribute to the understanding of evidence?
In his “Essay Concerning Human Understanding” (1690), Locke described the levels of probability, emphasizing moral certainty (widely agreed truths) and confidence (strong probability, but not certainty).
What role does testimony play in establishing the truth?
Testimony is crucial in determining the truth, especially when it contradicts personal experience or when multiple witnesses provide evidence, requiring the jury to assess credibility.
What are the criteria for evaluating testimony according to John Locke?
Locke’s criteria include the number of witnesses, their integrity, their ability to present evidence, the circumstances of the testimony, and the absence or presence of contradictory evidence.
What was Francis Bacon’s stance on credibility in evidence?
Bacon argued that the credibility of evidence was entirely within the conscience of the jury, meaning the jury’s judgment on whether to believe the testimony was key, regardless of whether the person was telling the truth.
What is the significance of the Anglican Church in relation to evidence rules?
The Anglican Church’s role as the governing religious institution reinforced the idea that truth and authority could be judged by the established hierarchy, paralleling how evidence was assessed in courts.
What was William Parkins’ contribution to moral philosophy in relation to legal evidence?
Parkins argued that conscience is a natural, innate capacity to judge right from wrong, influencing how juries and judges assess evidence based on moral reasoning.
How did the concept of conscience relate to legal judgment?
Conscience, according to Parkins, functions as an innate ability to distinguish good from bad, influencing legal decisions, but Locke viewed it as merely an opinion on the truth rather than a divine or innate sense of morality.
