Law and Nature

作者: David Delaney

DOI:

关键词:

摘要: This interdisciplinary study explores the relationship between conceptions of nature and (largely American) legal thought practice. It focuses on politics pragmatics talk as expressed in both extra-legal disputes their transformation translation into forms discourse (tort, property, contract, administrative law, criminal law constitutional law). Delaney begins by considering connection with very idea practice American theorization. He then traces a set specific political-legal arguments. The consists series contexts cases organized around conventional distinction 'external' 'internal nature': forces nature, endangered species, animal experiments, bestiality, reproductive technologies, genetic screening, biological defenses cases, involuntary medication inmates. demonstrates throughout that nearly any construal 'nature' entails an interpretation what it is to be (distinctively) human.

参考文章(194)
Coke, Edward, Sir, The first part of the institutes of the laws of England Legal Classics Library. ,(1985)
C. Edwin Baker, Property and Its Relation to Constitutionally Protected Liberty University of Pennsylvania Law Review. ,vol. 134, pp. 741- ,(1986) , 10.2307/3312019
J. Baird Callicott, Michael P. Nelson, The Great New Wilderness Debate University of Georgia Press. ,(1998)
Austin Sarat, ".. The Law Is All Over": Power, Resistance and the Legal Consciousness of the Welfare Poor Yale journal of law and the humanities. ,vol. 2, pp. 6- ,(1990)
Robert M. Cover, Violence and the Word Yale Law Journal. ,vol. 95, pp. 1601- ,(1986) , 10.2307/796468
Gary Peller, The Metaphysics of American Law California Law Review. ,vol. 73, pp. 1151- ,(1985) , 10.15779/Z38WM9J
Josephine Donovan, Carol J. Adams, Beyond animal rights : a feminist caring ethic for the treatment of animals Continuum. ,(1996)
Anita L. Allen, Surrogacy, slavery, and the ownership of life. Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy. ,vol. 13, pp. 139- ,(1990)
Meir Dan-Cohen, Responsibility and the Boundaries of the Self Harvard Law Review. ,vol. 105, pp. 959- ,(1992) , 10.2307/1341517