Bibliographic record
Abstract
damaging property, and those in which a person whose own life is not in danger breaks the law to save the life of another.I will also use his account to illustrate the difficulties with the leading alternatives. I. LAW AND MORALITYThis paper is part of a more general project, focused on Kant's legal and political philosophy, the central theme of which is that law must be understood in terms of the legitimate use of force, rather than as an instrument for achieving ends that are regarded as morally desirable from some other perspective.On this Kantian view, the basic structural features of a legal system are expressions of the system's entitlement to force people to respect the equal freedom of others.The claim to coerce depends upon the legal system's claim to do justice, but the connection is mediated through its systematic features.As a result, on the Kantian view, law does not and must not aspire to be morality or to capture every morally important distinction. 3Instead, it is limited to what he calls "external" lawgiving, that is, it must depend on laws for which the incentive for compliance does not depend on whether the person to whom the law is addressed accepts the law as a principle of action.The general idea of reciprocal limits on freedom provides Kant with the outline of an account of criminal law.The commission of crimes against persons and property is a particular way in which one person treats another as a mere means.Criminal law is part of a layer of public law governing relations between individuals and the state, built on underlying structures of the private law that govern interactions between private parties.The structure of the criminal law follows the structure of private wrongs, since the latter law defines the basic categories of wrongs against persons and property that are the main subject of the criminal law.Kant's account of private wrongdoing is not harm-based, but rights based: a private wrong is an interference with the freedom of another person. 4 There are two basic types of interference: injury and trespass.An injury involves depriving a person of some power to which he had a right-by damaging or literally depriving him of it.Injuries to person, property and reputation deprive their victims of powers that they had-their ability to use their own bodies, their goods, or their good name.Injuries restrict freedom, depriving persons of means that they had with which to set and pursue their own purposes.A trespass involves using another person or his goods in pursuit of an end that the latter person does not choose to pursue.Trespasses against person, property and reputation use what properly belongs to one person for another's purposes: one uses another's powers, and in so doing subjects the powers of the first to the other's choice.3Recent moral philosophy has often been criticized for being excessively legalistic; my own view is that criminal law theory is too often excessively moralistic.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.025 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".