Document Type


Publication Date

November 2018


In this paper I discuss Susan Haack’s illuminating discussion and constructive critique of the current confusion regarding the standards of proof employed in the law, focusing especially on mathematical probability rather than warranted belief interpretations of those standards. At the end, I question Haack’s claim that statistical evidence is relevant not only for establishing the existence of a causal process but also, although usually insufficient by itself, for proving actual causation in a specific case.

Included in

Torts Commons