The probable and the nonarbitrary: evidential foundations for a finding of guilt

The paper explores the use of statistical data and statistical assumptions as evidence in criminal trials. It is suggested that a finding of guilt includes not only its main factual proposition but also additional propositions that support and affirm it. Specifically, it includes not only the proposition that the defendant committed the offence but also the additional affirming proposition that it is this defendant rather than any other potential defendant who committed the offence (the ‘D rather than A’ proposition). Some statistical generalisations provide reasons in defence of the main proposition but not in defence of the affirming proposition, which then remains random or arbitrary. Yet since criminal convictions include a moral judgement, they cannot be justified where some of their propositions are arbitrary. Accordingly, such statistical generalisations cannot justify a criminal conviction.

Moral epistemology

Epistemology is the study of knowledge and justified belief. So moral epistemology is the study of what would be involved in knowing, or being justified in believing, moral propositions. Some discussions of moral epistemology interpret the category of ‘moral propositions’ broadly, to encompass all propositions that can be expressed with terms like ‘good’ or ‘bad’ or ‘ought’. Other discussions have focused on a narrower category of moral propositions – such as propositions about what rights people have, or about what we owe to each other. According to so-called noncognitivists, one cannot strictly speaking know (or be justified in believing) a moral proposition in the same sense in which one can know (or be justified in believing) an ordinary factual proposition. Other philosophers defend a cognitivist position, according to which it is possible to know or be justified in believing moral propositions in the very same sense as factual propositions. If one does know any moral propositions, they must presumably be true; and the way in which one knows those moral truths must provide access to them. This has led to a debate about whether one could ever know moral truths if a realist conception of these truths – according to which moral truths are not in any interesting sense of our making – were correct. Many philosophers agree that one way of obtaining justified moral beliefs involves seeking ‘reflective equilibrium’ – that is, roughly, considering theories, and adjusting one’s judgments to make them as systematic and coherent as possible. According to some philosophers, however, seeking reflective equilibrium is not enough: justified moral beliefs need to be supported by moral ‘intuitions’. Some hold that such moral intuitions are a priori, akin to our intuitions of the self-evident truths of mathematics. Others hold that these intuitions are closely related to emotions or sentiments; some theorists claim that empirical studies of moral psychology strongly support this ‘sentimentalist’ interpretation. Finally, moral thinking seems different from other areas of thought in two respects. First, there is particularly widespread disagreement about moral questions; and one rarely responds to such moral disagreement by retreating to a state of uncertainty as one does on other questions. Secondly, one rarely defers to other people’s moral judgments in the way in which one defers to experts about ordinary factual questions. These two puzzling features of moral thinking seem to demand explanation – which is a further problem that moral epistemology has to solve.

Impact Measures of the Article Headlines-Factual Proposition in the Delfi.lt Portal

The object of the article is article headlines of the internet news portal Delfi.lt: factual statements containing the mentioning of a person by their name, surname or pseudonym. A headline is perceived as a complex representative unit, where a complex means, namely, employing accompanying notes and illustrations, and is used to achieve its main functions: to inform and affect. The aim of the article is to identify the effect of factual statements employed in headlines, which the statements have on the person mentioned and how they serve in drawing the readers’ attention. The material for the analysis was collected from the internet news portal Delfi.lt. A total of 191 headlines including the illustrations were looked into. The analysis comprised not only the evaluation of the headlines but also the articles in their entirety, including illustrations and commentaries. The qualitative analysis of headlines as factual statements was carried out in three aspects: description of a person, naming the action performed by the person, and the relationship of the person and the illustration. The research revealed that the headlines of the internet news portal Delfi.lt often employ a person as a means of drawing the readers’ attention as well as illustrations as a means of conveying visual information complementing the headlines. It turned out that in the headlines taking the form of a factual statement, the readers’ attention is mostly drawn by the information of negative nature where the accompanying expressive illustrations present well- known persons, mainly Lithuanian politicians, businessmen, and sportsmen. Descriptions of a person exert no influence on the popularity of the article in cases where people well known to society are referred to but are of particular importance when dealing with much less known people. Expressions in the past simple tense are attractive to the readers since the expressions provide a possibility, based on the facts presented, to design potential consequences on one’s own. Expressive headlines with accompanying expressive illustrations, where the presented scene does not only specify the idea of the headline but also complements it with intriguing meanings, enjoy the highest popularity. Therefore, headlines and illustrations kindle the readers’ emotions and encourage them to interpret their own meanings.

The Constitutional Responsibility of Congress for Military Engagements

The U.S.-led military operation in Haiti has unfolded with minimal violence and few casualties so far. That factual proposition—which is necessarily subject to revision—has important ramifications under both U.S. constitutional law and international law. On the constitutional level, the avoidance of hostilities defused what was poised to become a serious confrontation between the President and the Congress. On the international level, doubts in some quarters about the legitimacy of a forcible intervention, although not entirely allayed, were somewhat quieted with the achievement of a negotiated solution, which enabled U.S. troops to bring about the return to power of President Aristide without having to shoot their way into Haiti.