Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Grades of Probability Modality in the Law of Evidence

  • Published:
Studia Logica Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The paper presents an infinite hierarchy PR m [m = 1, 2, . . . ] of sound and complete axiomatic systems for modal logic with graded probabilistic modalities, which are to reflect what I have elsewhere called the Bolding-Ekelöf degrees of evidential strength as applied to the establishment of matters of fact in law-courts. Our present approach is seen to differ from earlier work by the author in that it treats the logic of these graded modalities not only from a semantical or model-theoretic viewpoint but from a prooftheoretical and axiomatic stance as well. A paramount feature of the approach is its use of so-called systematic frame constants as labels of diverse grades of probability. Apart from this novel feature our approach can be seen to go back to pioneering work by Lou Goble in 1970.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

The literature on applications of probability theory to problems arising in the law of evidence and in the area of juridical proof is notoriously large, not to say massive. The present bibliography is selective in two respects: (i) it emphasizes items where probability grades are handled as modal notions amenable to techniques used in modal logic, and (ii) it emphasizes items belonging to the powerful research trend nowadays known as ‘Abduction’ or ‘Inference to the Best [Legal] Explanation’, including work on the so-called ‘Story Model’ of Juror Decision Making. By and large, the bibliography reflects current attempts to deal with the question as to which probabilistic literature is indeed relevant to the scientific study of juridical proof and law of evidence.

  1. Allen, R. J. (1994), ‘Factual Ambiguity and a Theory of Evidence’, Northwestern University Law Review 88 (1994), 604–640.

  2. Allen, R.J., and M.S. Pardo (2007), ‘The Problematic Value of Mathematical Models of Evidence’. Journal of Legal Studies 36 (2007), 107–138.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Åqvist, L. (1990), ‘Logical Analysis of Epistemic Modality, an Explication of the Bolding-Ekelöf Degrees of Evidential Strength’, in H. T. Klami (ed.), Rätt och Sanning (Law and Truth. A symposium on legal proof-theory in Uppsala, May 1989). Uppsala, Iustus Förlag, 1990, pp. 43–54.

  4. Åqvist, L. (1992), ‘Towards a Logical Theory of Legal Evidence: Semantic Analysis of the Bolding-Ekelöf Degrees of Evidential Strength’, in A.A. Martino (ed.), Expert Systems in Law, Amsterdam: North-Holland, Elsevier Science Publishers B.V., 1992, pp. 67–86.

  5. Åqvist, L. (2007), ‘An Interpretation of Probability in the Law of Evidence Based on Pro-et-Contra Argumentation’, Artificial Intelligence and Law 15 (2007), 391–410.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Åqvist, L. (1997), ‘Systematic frame constants in defeasible deontic logic: A new form of Andersonian reduction’, in D. Nute (ed.), Defeasible Deontic Logic, pp. 59–77. Dordrecht / Boston / London: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1997.

  7. Åqvist, L. (1999), ‘Supererogation and offence in deontic logic: an analysis within systems of alethic modal logic with levels of perfection’, in R. Sliwinski (ed.), Philosophical Crumbs (Essays Dedicated to Ann-Mari Henschen-Dahlquist on the Occasion of her Seventy-Fifth Birthday), Uppsala Philosophical Studies 49, pp. 261–276. Uppsala University: Department of Philosophy, 1999.

  8. Åqvist, L. (2000), ‘Three characterizability problems in deontic logic’, Nordic Journal of Philosophical Logic 5 (2000), 65–82.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Åqvist, L. (2002), ‘Deontic Logic’, in D. Gabbay and F. Guenthner (eds.), Handbook of Philosophical Logic, 2nd Edition, Vol. 8, pp. 147–264. Dordrecht / Boston / London: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2002.

  10. Bolding, P.O. (1951), Bevisbördan och den juridiska tekniken (Burden of Proof and Legal Technique), Uppsala: Appelbergs, 1951.

  11. Bolding, P.O. (1960), ‘Aspects of the Burden of Proof’, Scandinavian Studies in Law, Vol. 4 (1960), 9–28. Stockholm: Stockholm Institute for Sc. Law.

  12. Bolding, P.O. (1988), ‘Osannolikhet eller ovisshet? En fråga om behandling av alternativhypoteser vid bevisvärderingen’ (Improbability or Uncertainty? A Question about the Treatment of Alternative Hypotheses in the Evaluation of Legal Evidence), Svensk Juristtidning (The Swedish Law Review) Vol. 73 (1988), 606–609.

  13. Bolding, P.O. (1989), Går det att bevisa? (Can You Prove It?), Stockholm: Norstedts Förlag, 1989.

  14. Cohen, L. J. (1977), The Probable and The Provable, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1977.

  15. Ekelöf, P.O. (1963), Rättegång (Judicial Procedure) Vol. 4. 1st ed. Stockholm: Norstedts Förlag, 1963.

  16. Ekelöf, P.O. (1964), ‘Free Evaluation of Evidence’, Scandinavian Studies in Law, Vol. 8 (1964), 45–66. Stockholm: Stockholm Institute for Sc. Law.

  17. Ekelöf, P.O. (1983), ‘My Thoughts on Evidentiary Value, in P. Gärdenfors, B. Hansson, and N.-E. Sahlin (eds.), Evidentiary Value: Philosophical, Judicial and Psychological Aspects of a Theory (= Festschrift to S. Halldén. Library of Theoria No. 15), pp. 9–26. Lund: Gleerups, 1983.

  18. Gabbay, D.M., and J. Woods (2005), ‘Logic and the Law: Crossing the Lines of Discipline’, in V. F. Hendricks, S.A. Pedersen, and D.M. Gabbay (eds.), ΦNEWS (The Newsletter for Philosophical Logic and its Applications), Vol. 7 (2005), 4–46. Published by the Danish Network for Philosophical Logic and its Applications (= ΦLOG) and Springer.

  19. Goble, L. F. (1970), ‘Grades of Modality’, Logique et Analyse 51 (1970), 323–334.

  20. Gorphe, Fr. (1947), L’appréciation des preuves en justice (The Assessment of Proofs in Law), Paris: Librairie du recueil Sirey, 1947.

  21. Harman, G. (1965), ‘The inference to the best explanation’, Philosophical Review 74:1 (1965), 88–95.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Kripke, S.A. (1963), ‘Semantical Analysis of Modal Logic I: Normal Modal Propositional Calculi’, Zeitschrift für mathematische Logik und Grundlagen der Mathematik 9 (1963), 67–96.

  23. Lemmon, E. J., and D. Scott, (1966), Intensional Logic, preliminary draft of initial chapters by E. J. Lemmon, July 1966, Nowadays available as An Introduction to Modal Logic (American Philosophical Quarterly Monograph No. 11) edited by K. Segerberg. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1977.

  24. Lipton, P. (2004), Inference to the Best Explanation (2nd edition), London: Routledge, 2004.

  25. Lycan, W.G. (1988), Judgment and Justification, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988.

  26. Makinson, D. (1966), ‘On some completeness theorems in modal logic’, Zeitschrift für mathematische Logik und Grundlagen der Mathematik 12 (1966), 379–384.

  27. Pardo, M.S., and R.J. Allen (2008), ‘Juridical Proof and the Best Explanation’, Law and Philosophy 27:3 (2008), 223–268.

  28. Pennigton, N., and R. Hastie (1991), ‘A Cognitive Model of Juror Decision Making: The Story Model’, Cardozo Law Review 13:5 (1991): 519–557.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Suppes, P. (1957), Introduction to Logic, Princeton: van Nostrand, 1957.

  30. Suppes, P. (1972), ‘Finite equal-interval measurement structures’, Theoria 38 (1972), 45–63.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Thagard, P.R. (1978), ‘The Best Explanation: Criteria for Theory Choice’, Journal of Philosophy 75:2 (1978), 76–92.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Law, Uppsala University, 751 20, Uppsala, Sweden

    Lennart Åqvist

Authors
  1. Lennart Åqvist
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lennart Åqvist.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Åqvist, L. Grades of Probability Modality in the Law of Evidence. Stud Logica 94, 307–330 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11225-010-9238-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11225-010-9238-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation