Course Syllabus

Jump to Today

Philos 166 - Philosophy of Law: The Epistemology of Legal Practice 

Summer 2024 Session A

Updated: 7/19/24

 

Lecture: MW 1:00 pm – 3:05 pm

Location: Online (Zoom Room).

Instructor: Mikaela Grace Mackenzie

Email: mgmackenzie@ucla.edu

Office Hours: MW 3:05 pm – 4:05 pm 

Location: Online (Same zoom as lecture)

Section: M 10:30am-11:20am (1A); W 11:30am-12:20pm (1B)

Location: Online

TA: Hannah Widmaier

Email: hwidmaier@g.ucla.edu

Office Hours: M 11:20 am - 12:20 pm; W 10:20 am - 11:20 am

 

Course Description

How do we interpret the various legal standards of proof, (e.g., “by a preponderance of evidence” or “beyond a reasonable doubt”)? Can mere statistical evidence ever satisfy these standards? In what ways are these standards sensitive to practical factors? Should epistemology play a role in legal proof? How can we correctly specify and encode more concrete values into judicial artificial-intelligence (AI) in a way that ensures that these values are followed or respected as intended? Should algorithms that predict recidivism have access to race? These are the central questions we will consider in this course.

 

The epistemology of legal practice, or legal epistemology, has exploded in recent years. There has been a lot of debate amongst philosophers and legal scholars surrounding the use of statistical evidence in legal proceedings. This debate has prompted discussions regarding the legal value of epistemic concepts such as sensitivity and knowledge and how such concepts may apply to evidential standards and legal proof. In this course, we will discuss some of the key threads in this debate. We will begin by discussing some of the literature on the problem of mere statistical evidence. We will then discuss some new and exciting literature in legal epistemology on the use of emerging technologies such as algorithms and artificial intelligence. We will conclude by discussing whether the law should care about epistemology.

 

*Note: No prior knowledge of statistics is required or presumed.

 

Texts

Readings will be made available on Bruinlearn.

 

Grading Breakdown

Participation: 20%

See Hannah's section syllabus for more details.

Reading Responses (3 x 10%): 30%

Instructions: Pick ONE of the week’s readings and write 2-3 short-mid length paragraphs stating (1) the main claim of that reading and (2) the support provided, by the author, for that claim. If there appears to be more than one central claim, write about the one that you think is most central. *Do not exceed 350 words.* These assignments will be graded pass/progressing/fail (see reading response rubric).

Due dates:

Reading Response #1: Monday 7/1 @10am

Reading Response #2: Monday 7/8 @10am

Reading Response #3: Monday 7/15 @10am

Single-page paper outline: 10%

Graded complete/incomplete. Due Monday 7/22 Wednesday 7/24 at midnight.

5–7-page final paper: 40%

Letter grading. Due Wednesday 7/31 at midnight.

 

Late Policy

Work turned in late will be penalized 1/3 of a letter grade for every day that it is late (e.g. A- to B+).

 

Accommodations

If you are already registered with the Center for Accessible Education (CAE), please request your Letter of Accommodation in the Student Portal. If you are seeking registration with the CAE, please submit your request for accommodations via the CAE website. Students with disabilities requiring academic accommodations should submit their request for accommodations as soon as possible, as it may take up to two weeks to review the request. For more information, please visit the CAE website (www.cae.ucla.edu), visit the CAE at A255 Murphy Hall, or contact us by phone at (310) 825-1501.

 

Academic Integrity

Academic dishonesty will not be tolerated. Cite all sources consulted including artificial-intelligence chat-bots like ChatGPT. Passing off a chat-bot’s answers as your own is plagiarism. Consult the student code of conduct for more information on academic misconduct: https://www.deanofstudents.ucla.edu/individual-student-code.

 

ChatGPT

Exercise extreme caution when consulting ChatGPT because, as with anything you read on the internet, ChatGPT doesn’t always provide the most accurate information.

 

Helpful Resources

  • Counseling and Psychological Services (CAPS) offers a wide variety of services to support your mental health needs crisis counseling available by phone 24 hours a day / 7 days a week (www.counseling.ucla.edu and 310-825-0768).
  • The Undergraduate Writing Center is a free service for all UCLA students. They offer students one-on-one feedback and support on their writing. The Center is staffed by peer learning facilitators (PLFs), undergraduates who are trained to help at any stage in the writing process and with writing assignments from across the curriculum. PLFs tailor appointments to the concerns of each writer. Sessions can focus on how to approach an assignment, on formulating a thesis, on fleshing out a plan/outline for a draft, on reading a draft with the writer to check for clarity and flow, on incorporating and citing sources, on revising a paper based on instructor feedback, or on tackling grammar or sentence structure problems. You can make in-person appointments, walk-in appointments, or online sessions. https://wp.ucla.edu/wc/
  • (New!) The Philosophy Writing Center (PWC) offers one-on-one Philosophy-specific writing advice from fellow Philosophy undergraduate majors, minors, and/or recent BA alumni who are trained as Peer Learning Facilitators (PLFs).

 

Reading Schedule (*Subject to change*)

 

Unit 1: Mere Statistical Evidence and Legal Proof

Week 1

Class 1 (Mon 6/24)

Introduction. Optional: Thomson. 1986. "Liability and Individualized Evidence."

Class 2 (Wed 6/26)

Enoch, Spectre, & Fisher. 2012. “Statistical Evidence, Sensitivity, and the Legal Value of Knowledge.”

Optional: Hawthorne, Isaacs & Sridharan. 2021. “Statistical evidence and incentives in the law.”

Week 2

Class 3 (Mon 7/1) Reading Response Due 10 AM

Moss, Sarah. 2018. “Knowledge and Persons.” In Probabilistic Knowledge by Sarah Moss, pp. 201-230.

Class 4 (Wed 7/3)

Smartt, Tim. 2022. "Reconsidering the rule of consideration probabilistic knowledge and legal proof."

Week 3

Class 5 (Mon 7/8) Reading Response Due 10 AM

Bolinger, Renee (forthcoming). “Explaining the Justificatory Asymmetry between Statistical and Individualized Evidence.” In Jon Robson & Zachary Hoskins (eds.), The Social Epistemology of Legal Trials.

 

Unit 2: The Future for Legal Proceedings

Class 6 (Wed 7/10)

Gardiner, Georgi. 2023. "Corroboration."

Week 4

Class 7 (Mon 7/15) Reading Response Due 10 AM

Slater, Joe. 2023. "Just Judge: The Jury on Trial."

Class 8 (Wed 7/17)

Winter, Hollman, & Manheim. 2023. "Value alignment for advanced artificial judicial intelligence."

Week 5

Class 9 (Mon 7/22)

Purves, Duncan & Jeremy Davis. 2023. "Should Algorithms that Predict Recidivism Have Access to Race?"

 

Unit 3: Should the law care about epistemology?

Class 10 (Wed 7/24) Paper Outline Due at midnight

Enoch, David & Talia Fisher & Levi Spectre. 2021. "Does legal epistemology rest on a mistake?"

Week 6

Class 11 (Mon 7/29)

Ross, Lewis. 2022. "The Foundations of Criminal Law Epistemology."

 

Class 12 (Wed 7/31) Final Paper Due at midnight

Review class.

 

Course Summary:

Date Details Due