Law's Empire¶
Dworkin, R. (1986). Law's Empire. Harvard University Press.
Cited by¶
2 citations across 2 artifacts.
Each citation links to the sentence it supports in the citing article.
Primes¶
- Adjudication (Dispute Resolution)
- This often requires counterfactual reasoning—what would a reasonable person have intended?—and balancing abstract principles: justice versus efficiency, individual rights versus collective welfare, strict liability versus negligence, an interpretive activity Dworkin (1986) likened to constructing the most coherent moral reading of legal materials as integrity rather than mere rule-application.
This sourceDevelops 'law as integrity' and constructive interpretation — reading legal practice as the best instance of the principles that justify it — supplying the counterfactual structure of the abstract-reasoning account (D49-006).
- This often requires counterfactual reasoning—what would a reasonable person have intended?—and balancing abstract principles: justice versus efficiency, individual rights versus collective welfare, strict liability versus negligence, an interpretive activity Dworkin (1986) likened to constructing the most coherent moral reading of legal materials as integrity rather than mere rule-application.
- Interpretation
- The counterfactual is substrate-neutral: it works on a statute, a manuscript, a dataset, a CT image, a feature vector, or a peptide presentation — paralleling Dworkin's (1986) constructive-interpretation method, in which the best reading is the one that would survive a shift in the principles that justify it.
This sourceDevelops "law as integrity" and the method of constructive interpretation — reading legal practice as the best instance of the principles that justify it — and supplies the counterfactual structure (shift the justifying principles, shift the reading) used in the prime's abstract-reasoning account.
- The counterfactual is substrate-neutral: it works on a statute, a manuscript, a dataset, a CT image, a feature vector, or a peptide presentation — paralleling Dworkin's (1986) constructive-interpretation method, in which the best reading is the one that would survive a shift in the principles that justify it.
Verification¶
Does it exist? Not checked yet. This entry carries no identifier to resolve. It was extracted from the citation as written in the article, normalized, and deduplicated against the rest of the registry.
Does it back the claim? Not recorded. Neither this nor any other of the 2 citations of this work carries a recorded support check.
Support is checked per citation rather than per work — the same source can be cited soundly in one article and wrongly in another. Per-citation recording began recently, so a citation with no recorded check is a gap in the record rather than evidence it went unchecked.
See how references were verified.
Registry ID ref:963c054f42c4 · see in the full table