Pre-figuration and evaluation / Pierre Schlag.
In this response to Professor Rubin, Professor Schlag argues that a prescriptive theory of evaluation does not free an evaluator from the bias inherent in his own pre-figurations. On the contrary, the belief that better evaluative criteria will advance the cause of fairer evaluation is itself an eff...
Saved in:
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Other title: | California law review. Colorado Law faculty scholarship collection. |
| Format: | Book |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
[Berkeley, Calif. :
School of Jurisprudence of the University of California],
1992.
|
| Series: | California law review ;
v. 80, no. 4 (July 1992) |
| Subjects: |
| Summary: | In this response to Professor Rubin, Professor Schlag argues that a prescriptive theory of evaluation does not free an evaluator from the bias inherent in his own pre-figurations. On the contrary, the belief that better evaluative criteria will advance the cause of fairer evaluation is itself an effect of flawed and unrationalized pre-figurations of conventional legal thought. Professor Schlag argues that the evaluation question and its attendant disputes arise from a more significant development-the unraveling of the dominant paradigm of legal thought, the decomposition of normative legal thought. |
|---|---|
| Item Description: | Article contained in the Vol. 80, no. 4 (July 1992) issue of California law review. |
| Physical Description: | Article on p. 965-977. |