Heavily Accented Philosophy of Law

• Episode 7 - The debate on rules & principles, genericity and categorisation (fr. Pedro Moniz Lopes)

  In this episode, we delve into the debate on rules and principles, the topic of law and categorisation, and the connection between equality (and analogy). Why the obsession in philosophy of law with the rules/principles debate? Is the distinction purely definitional or also substantial? How is the element of genericity – not generality - important for the debate? Does equality have something to do here? And analogy? Pedro Moniz Lopes discusses with us why the distinction between rules and principles is better understood as a strong distinction, different of the kind proposed by Robert Alexy. This strong distinction is based on the key criterion of genericity – that is, based on the specificity of the action that is being governed by the norm. We explore how categorisation might not be purely didactical or pedagogical and its role in allowing us to anticipate the way entities behave in reality, the possible parallels between principles in law and causal forces in the natural world in regards to explanation, how equality factors in the discussion regarding genericity and principles, and how analogy enters the picture.   Pedro Moniz Lopes is an Assistant Professor of Legal Philosophy and Constitutional Law at the Faculty of Law, University of Lisbon. He co-heads “Lisbon Legal Theory” and is a Senior Fellow of the Lisbon Public Law Research Centre in which he coordinates research activities in the field legal theory and legal philosophy.  Pedro has also been the Executive Director of e-Publica – Public Law Journal for the past 10 years.  His current research interests are constitutional equality and analogical reasoning, linguistic and logical accounts of generic norm sentences and marginal utility of fundamental rights.  Pedro’s work is mostly available at his academia page: https://pedromonizlopes.academia.edu/ [This episode was hosted by Julieta Rabanos and Bojan Spaić; edited by Bojan Spaić; uploaded and formatted by Julieta Rabanos]   (00:00:00) Intro HAPL (00:00:18) Introduction to the episode (00:01:09) Pedro Moniz Lopes – Academic Genealogy and Research Interests (00:07:07) Research Groups – Lisbon Legal Theory and History (00:13:54) Rules & principles: Arrival to the Distinction and Criteria for Distinguishing (00:26:12) Rules & principles: what entities are they? How does this connect with the issue of categorisation? (00:32:28) Genericity as the distinction criterion between rules & principles (00:48:04) The role of equality in the discussion on categorisation & rules and principles (01:00:24) Equality and analogy: similarities and differences (01:08:55) How to Frame the Discussions regarding Rules & Principles: from the Legal System to Legal Practitioners (01:16:58) Farewell and last words (01:21:00) Outro HAPL

  --------  

  1:21:26
• Episode 6 - Non-human agents and the construction of legal reality (ft. Antonia Waltermann)

  In this episode, we delve into the topics of non-human agents, the construction of legal reality, and the encompassing role of legal education. What does it mean to be an agent? In which sense can we talk about non-human agents? Can we say that legal reality is “constructed”? How do we fit non-human agents within this legal reality? How does legal education participate in it? Antonia Waltermann discusses with us why researching on agency is important for the study of law, and why it is also important to extend the research also to what can be called “non-human agents”. We also explore what does it mean for legal reality to be a social construction and how and to what extent non-human agents might be considered as participating in such construction, as well as how legal education fits the picture through its presence, content, and influence on human agents. Antonia M. Waltermann is assistant professor of legal theory and philosophy at the Faculty of Law of Maastricht University. She has been a visiting scholar at Stockholm, Bologna and Ljubljana University. She has worked on sovereignty (e.g. Reconstructing Sovereignty, Springer Law and Philosophy Library, 2019), law and the cognitive sciences (e.g. in Law and Mind, Cambridge University Press, 2021) and non-human agency (e.g. in Law, Science and Rationality, Eleven International Publishing, 2019). Her current research focuses on social ontology, particularly on the agency and responsibility of non-human entities (including but not limited to AI) both within the law and when it comes to the (social) construction of law. As regards education, she has extensive experience with legal education in various roles, including but not limited to course design, coordination, and evaluation. Most recently, she is involved in educational design and policy at a programme level as well. [This episode was hosted by Julieta Rabanos and Bojan Spaić; edited by Bojan Spaić; uploaded and formatted by Julieta Rabanos]

  --------  

  1:25:06
• Episode 5 - The Nature of International Law (ft. Miodrag Jovanović)

  In this episode, we delve into the encompassing topic of international law, exploring it through the eyes of philosophy of law. Can our conceptions of law encompass international law? Is there something akin of a nature of international law? What would be the main elements to determine such a nature? Miodrag Jovanović discusses why there has been a historical lack of philosophical interest in international law, and then delves into the analysis of the possibility to identify a nature of international law and its elements. We also explore how the choice of methodological perspective changes the approach to the existence and content of such nature, the properties of coercion and justice appness of international law, and inquire about the emergence of global law as a phenomenom and a field of study. Miodrag A. Jovanović is a Full Professor in Jurisprudence, at the Faculty of Law, University of Belgrade. He also teaches at the Legal Methods module of the European Master in Legal Theory, at the Goethe University, Frankfurt. He is a fellow of the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation and the 2016 Brandon Fellow of the Lauterpacht Centre for International Law (Cambridge). His internationally published books include Constitutionalizing Secession in Federalized States: A Procedural Approach (Eleven International Publishing, 2007), Collective Rights – A Legal Theory (Cambridge University Press, 2012), and Unpacking Normativity – Conceptual, Normative and Descriptive Issues (co-edited with Kenneth Einar Himma and Bojan Spaić) (Hart Publishing, 2018) In you want to dive deeper into the topic of the nature of international law and philosophy of international law, you can check Miodrag’s book “⁠The Nature of International Law⁠” (Cambridge University Press, 2019). [This episode was hosted by Julieta Rabanos and Bojan Spaić; edited by Bojan Spaić; uploaded and formatted by Julieta Rabanos] (00:00:00) Intro HAPL (00:00:05) Introduction to the episode (00:01:25) Miodrag Jovanovic – Academic Genealogy and the Interest for International Law (00:09:12) Academy and a Generalised lack of philosophical interest regarding International Law – Why are the reasons? (00:14:32) Are our concepts and conceptions of law enough or adequate to give an account of International Law? (00:32:18) In search of the “nature” of International Law: conceptual analysis and methodology (00:52:08) The nature of international law: what are its typical features? How does coercion fit here? And global law? (01:03:30) The nature of international law and fragmentation of international law (01:11:40) The nature of international law: internal and external perspectives (01:16:41) Farewell (01:18:35) Outro

  --------  

  1:18:45
• Episode 4: Evidential Reasoning & Evidence Law (ft. Giovanni Tuzet)

  The guest for this fourth episode of the HAPL podcast is Giovanni Tuzet, currently Full Professor of Philosophy of Law at Bocconi University (Milan, Italy). In the first part of this interview with Julieta Rabanos and Bojan Spaić, Tuzet talks about his academic path to the present and introduces the topic of evidential reasoning, starting from the most general question about legal reasoning and moving towards evidential reasoning and evidence law. He analyses the similarities and differences between evidential reasoning and other domains of factual reasoning, and explains different criteria for admissible evidence in law and those other domains. In the second part of the interview, Tuzet discusses his approach to the relation of truth and evidence (developed in his recent book “La prova ragionata”) and its differences with other approaches. The debate goes on to touch admissibility of evidence, evaluation criteria, and standards of proof, evidence and inference, probabilism and control of the inferences, artificial intelligence and evidential reasoning, and much more. (00:00:00) HAPL Intro (00:00:18) Introduction – Welcome to Giovanni Tuzet & Academic Genealogy (00:05:52) A general account of legal reasoning (00:10:47) Reasoning & Argumentation: public and private aspects of reasoning (00:13:00) Legal Reasoning & Inferentialism (00:19:06) Evidential Reasoning in Law and in Other Domains (00:27:25) ER: Admissibility of Evidence in Law – general concept (00:33:32) ER: Truth and Evidence in “La prova ragionata” (Giuffre, 2023) (00:39:54) ER: Admissibility of Evidence in Law – criteria of admissibility and exclusion (00:46:37) ER: Evidence & Inference (ft. Sherlock Holmes) (01:01:53) ER: Probabilism & Control of the results of ER (01:13:58) ER & Artificial Intelligence – limits and possibilities (01:20:44) ER: Standards of Proof (01:30:23) ER & Artificial Intelligence – would an AI have convicted OJ Simpson? (01:35:06) Interview end – Farewell to Giovanni Tuzet (01:36:58) HAPL Outro [This episode was hosted by Julieta Rabanos and Bojan Spaić; edited by Bojan Spaić; uploaded and formatted by Julieta Rabanos]

  --------  

  1:37:27
• Episode 3: Artificial Intelligence and Legal Theory (ft. Domingos Farinho)

  The guest for this third episode of the HAPL podcast is Domingos Soares Farinho, currently professor auxiliar at the Faculdade de Direito of the Universidade de Lisboa, member of the Centro de Investigação em Direito Público (CIDP) do Instituto de Ciências Jurídico-Políticas da Faculdade de Direito da Universidade de Lisboa, and member of Lisbon’s ALF team. In the first part of this highly interactive interview with Julieta Rabanos and Bojan Spaić, Farinho introduces his academic genealogy and discusses with the hosts about the relation between legal theory and legal practice, focusing on Portugal’s experience on the matter and his personal experience as a practitioner. In the second part of the interview, Farinho discusses with the hosts about the relation and influence between technology development, law, and philosophy of law. The debate goes on to touch upon regulation of digital content, artificial intelligence, science fiction, production of texts by artificial intelligence, autonomy and liability, criteria for legal personhood, and much more. (00:00:00) HAPL Introduction (00:00:15) Interview Introduction – Welcome to Domingos Farinho (& General Rumbling) (00:04:25) Academic Genealogy and Non-Academic Experience (00:12:57) Relationship between Legal Theory and Legal Practice: Portugal’s experience (00:29:20) Relationship between Legal Theory and Legal Practice: Farinho’s experience (00:37:38) Artificial Intelligence, Algorithms and Autonomy (00:53:49) When does AI Matter to Law? Embodied Artificial Intelligence and the Possibility of Lawyer’s Replacement (01:09:27) Artificial Intelligence, Legal Personhood, and Science Fiction (01:23:41) Artificial Intelligence, Autonomy, and Liability (01:52:29) Interview end – Farewell to Domingos Farinho (01:53:16) HAPL Outro [This episode was hosted by Julieta Rabanos and Bojan Spaić; edited by Bojan Spaić; uploaded and formatted by Julieta Rabanos]

  --------  

  1:53:26

Mais podcasts de Ciência

Podcasts em tendência em Ciência

Sobre Heavily Accented Philosophy of Law