Chance and Causality: Of Crows,Palm Trees,God and Salvation

This paper was written for a workshop, Chance and Contingency in Indian Philosophy, that was held at Yale University in May 2017. It examines the role that chance plays by focusing on the popular maxim of the crow and the palm tree. It argues that while representatives of different schools of thought were aware of the possibility of purely random occurrences, they dealt with it very differently. For some like the Vedāntins chance provided proof of their positions, while for others, Naiyāyikas and Buddhists, chance was a challenge, particularly to their theories of inference.     

Causality and Causation in Law, Medicine, Psychiatry, and Psychology: Progression or Regression?

In this article, I review recent developments in the areas of law, medicine, psychiatry, and psychology concerning causality and causation. I analyze the validity of the 2008 edition of the American Medical Association (AMA)’s guides to the evaluation of permanent impairment and its accompanying volume on causation. I conclude with recommendations for a synthetic approach to causality in the legal field and a more consistent model of impairment in the mental health one. The AMA’s book on medical causation needs careful revision.     

Causality and causation in tort law

This paper considers alternative approaches to dealing with causal uncertainty in strict liability tort regimes. Beginning from the philosophical literature on causing, a distinction is made between the scientific idea of causality and the legal idea of causation. This distinction is generalized to a context of causal uncertainty and associated probabilities are constructed. It is shown that a rule of proportional liability whereby the tortfeasor pays damages in proportion to the probability in causation of them having caused the damage would be socially efficient. This contrasts with the implied use of the probability in causality by the courts and in the law and economics literature on causal uncertainty.     

试论帮助犯的因果关系

共犯的特殊性决定了共犯因果性的判断不能完全适用有关正犯因果关系的理论.帮助犯的因果性系帮助犯客观归责的基础与前提,帮助犯因果关系的构建应当以共犯的处罚根据为基础;其因果性的判断应以实行行为促进说为原则,以正犯结果引起说为补充.     

刑法因果关系问题再研究

从胡某案件人手,对国内外单独犯因果关系的学说进行了评述,并对共同犯罪因果关系的学说进行了认真的研究,肯定了毕克迈耶与牧野英一的共同犯罪因果关系学说的现代价值,以此为借鉴分析胡某案件中涉及的共同犯罪的因果关系问题,提出考察本案因果关系应遵循的整体性原则,即共犯行为间有引起与被引起的关系,它们互为条件、互相配合、纵横交错,具有单个犯罪所不具有的特殊性;各共犯的行为与犯罪结果之间无论是直接的因果关系还是间接的因果关系,都是一种不容否认的客观存在;共犯的因果关系还具有双重性的特征,即大因果关系与小因果关系.由此得出胡某与张某、江某均应以故意伤害罪论处的结论.     

美国反补贴法中“因果关系”的确定及其对我国的启示

在反补贴调查中,"因果关系"的审查和确定是决定反补贴措施是否公平合理的关键所在,各国对此做法不同、争论很大.在"因果关系"的确定上,WTO补贴与反补贴措施协议>的规定存在不明确之处,各国对其保留有相当程度的解释空间.美国反补贴法在因果关系上的用语与<补贴与反补贴措施协议>不同,同时还存在两个重要的争议因果关系是应存在于"进口"与"损害"之间,还是存在于"补贴"与"损害"之间;应同时决定还是别决定损害与因果关系.在因果关系的具体分析方法上,我国可借鉴美国的"整体分析法".     

论保险法上的因果关系原则

因果关系原则是保险损害赔偿中的重要原则,它直接决定保险人是否承担保险合同项下的赔付责任.我国保险相关立法对此未做明文规定,实务中,理赔与诉讼往往运用英美法上的近因原则,成文法的缺失导致实践中保险理赔的诉讼案件判决不一.因此,在分析了保险法上各种因果关系的判断标准后,建议建立我国保险法上的近因原则,并提出其相应的应用规则以实现其可操作性.     

公害犯罪因果关系推定

公害,作为经济高度发展的产物,正在给国民生活带来巨大威胁.公害犯罪因果关系的证明具有科技性、间接性、积累性、长期性、潜伏性和滞后性等特点.在此情况下,若固守传统的刑法因果关系理论,不仅会使诉讼陷入不必要的科学论争,而且也往往会因原告方无法证明事实因果关系的存在而使大量的公害犯罪得不到应有的制裁,使受害者的权益得不到及时的救济,有损于公平正义的法制理念.因此,应当在公害犯罪因果关系的认定中引人推定.     

论不作为犯罪的因果关系

不作为犯罪的因果关系 ,是指存在于不作为与它所引起的危害结果之间的一种内在的、本质的、合乎规律的引起与被引起的联系。这种因果关系可分为起因性因果关系和防果破坏性因果关系两种。对于具有起因性因果关系的不作为犯罪 ,不能把因果关系的特殊性作为从轻处罚的情节 ;对于具有防果破坏性因果关系的不作为犯罪 ,应把因果关系的特殊性作为从轻处罚的一个酌定情节。     

医疗损害案件中相当因果关系研究

因果关系是侵权责任构成中的核心要件,也是侵权行为归责的基础和前提。相当因果关系说作为我国目前的主流学说之一,由"条件关系"和"相当性"两个部分组成,其基本思路与英美法系的二分法相似。医疗损害纠纷案件具有复杂性、不确定性、未知性等特点,从而使得如何判断因果关系及原因力始终是医疗损害纠纷案件中的难题。而目前司法鉴定的专业性、客观性已经在医疗损害案件中发挥了越来越多的作用,司法鉴定意见可作为重要证据供法官参考。     

论行政侵权赔偿责任因果关系

行政赔偿因果关系是法律关系的一个连接点,行政赔偿因果关系的认定模式应构建在对因果关系适当分类的基础上。"公平正义"应作为行政赔偿因果关系认定的基本准则,行政赔偿因果关系应重新定义。     

相当因果关系理论的展开

法规目的说解决的并非因果关系问题,而是违法性问题。相当因果关系理论具备担当一般性因果关系理论的条件,其判断的是,行为对损害发生可能性的提升程度是否具有相当性。相当性判断以一定的知识量为背景,知识量的确定遵循"常人基础上的适度增加"之准则。诸多价值判断需要通过相当性判断来实现,而且,相当性具有程度的不同,责任的量应与相当性之程度相适应。     

The Triangle Shirtwaist Factory Fire of 1911: Social Change, Industrial Accidents, and the Evolution of CommonHSense Causality

This article is part of a larger study on the history of industrial safety law in the United States, one that places particular emphasis on the development of competing attributions of the causes of industrial injury as that development relates to changes in technology, political economy, and culture. The Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire of 1911, long noted as a catalyst for Progressive Era factory reform, evorked a change in the legal culture's "common sense" of why and how industrial injuries took place. By focusing on and making tangible causal theories that had been in circulation for some time but never embodied successfully in the law, the Triangle fire destroyed long-standing ideological barriers to factory legislation. It thus played a significant role in laying the epistemological foundation of the modern regulatory state.     

回归与突破：我国刑法因果关系在归属层面的厘清

我国传统因果关系理论对因果关系作纯客观定位的同时在判断上混入了一定的规范内涵,这使它在结果归属层面存在含混不清的缺陷,也使它在具体案件处理上缺乏司法适应性。作为欧陆刑法因果关系理论晚近学说的修正的相当因果关系说和危险的现实化理论,都没有在结果归属层面抛弃规范的内容,更没有将刑法因果关系的成立范围局限于客观的层面。并且,尽管修正的相当因果关系说、危险的现实化理论和客观归属论都没能提供完善的结果归属判断标准,但客观归属论在方法论、下位规则等方面对刑法因果关系理论完善具有明显的比较优势。我国传统因果关系理论危机的应对不是一条回归刑法因果关系是纯客观的判断之路,而是一条在借鉴归属层面理论有益素材基础上纳入规范性判断的突破之路。     

刑法中因果关系的层次及其标准

研究刑法因果关系,必须放弃必然性或偶然性的一层次逻辑方式,而以三个层次,分别依不同标准进行判断.在判断条件关系是否成立时,依据一般经验法则;在定量分析时,根据"动力规则";在定性时,则要兼顾罪责刑相适应的原则和刑法的"但书"规定.     

Legal Causality and Criminal Intent in the Legal Discourse

In this article I analyse linguistic means employed to reconstruct causality in court. Identifying the causal relations that induced the occurrence in reality is particularly important when the mental element of the offence is considered proving criminal intent is showing existence of a causal relation between an intention and a legally prohibited act.I show that the legal significance of an action depends on the time of the action relative to other events. I will show that in the legal-criminal discourse simultaneity implies causality. In particular, if discussing a concrete occurrence, an event is proved to be simultaneous or almost simultaneous with an action – then causation between the action and the event is commonly implied if the event seems to the court as a reasonable motive for the particular action.I exemplify how the institutional speakers use time conjunctions indicating actions that happen simultaneously or almost simultaneously in order to prove existence of a causal relation, and how they present the simultaneity as incidental in order to deny existence of such a relation.