繁重
发表于 2025-3-26 22:51:59
http://reply.papertrans.cn/89/8828/882769/882769_31.png
ANTI
发表于 2025-3-27 04:48:53
http://reply.papertrans.cn/89/8828/882769/882769_32.png
LUCY
发表于 2025-3-27 08:53:25
http://reply.papertrans.cn/89/8828/882769/882769_33.png
Arroyo
发表于 2025-3-27 12:17:47
http://reply.papertrans.cn/89/8828/882769/882769_34.png
opalescence
发表于 2025-3-27 14:14:47
http://reply.papertrans.cn/89/8828/882769/882769_35.png
Engulf
发表于 2025-3-27 19:42:23
http://reply.papertrans.cn/89/8828/882769/882769_36.png
Arthr-
发表于 2025-3-27 23:38:10
http://reply.papertrans.cn/89/8828/882769/882769_37.png
Conclave
发表于 2025-3-28 03:08:09
http://reply.papertrans.cn/89/8828/882769/882769_38.png
反对
发表于 2025-3-28 06:53:54
Problems at the Basis of Susan Haack’s Foundherentism we discuss Haack’s foundherentism and argue that it shares an important trait with foundationalism, a trait that is at the core of one of the biggest problems of foundationalist theories. And as it seems to us, Haack’s foundherentism does not supply the resources for a satisfying solution to this problem.
Desert
发表于 2025-3-28 13:39:16
Pragmatism, Evolutionary Theory and the Plurality of Legal Systems: On Susan Haack’s Philosophy of L. Secondly, the limits of an evolutionary perspective of law recommended by legal pragmatism are considered. Finally, the paper discusses whether legal pragmatism is able to handle different legal traditions, thereby focusing on Anglo-American common law and European civil law.