Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
A value judgment (or normative judgement) is a judgment of the rightness or wrongness of something or someone, or of the usefulness of something or someone, based on a comparison or other relativity. As a generalization, a value judgment can refer to a judgment based upon a particular set of values or on a particular value system. A related ...
For example, a statute that says "No person may smoke in a hospital" does not mean that "John Doe may not smoke in a hospital"; the second statement is the law only if a legitimate authority declares so. This is because one cannot describe a legal statement as right or wrong without making a normative value judgment about what the law should be.
Normative has specialized meanings in different academic disciplines such as philosophy, social sciences, and law. In most contexts, normative means 'relating to an evaluation or value judgment.' Normative propositions tend to evaluate some object or some course of action. Normative content differs from descriptive content. [3]
In law, a judgment is a decision of a court regarding the rights and liabilities of parties in a legal action or proceeding. [1] [2] Judgments also generally provide the court's explanation of why it has chosen to make a particular court order.
Jurisprudence, also known as theory of law or philosophy of law, is the examination in a general perspective of what law is and what it ought to be.It investigates issues such as the definition of law; legal validity; legal norms and values; as well as the relationship between law and other fields of study, including economics, ethics, history, sociology, and political philosophy.
In foreclosure cases, a deficiency judgment is a court order allowing a lender to collect the remaining mortgage balance when the proceeds from the sale of the property aren’t enough to pay off ...
The fact–value distinction is a fundamental epistemological distinction described between: [1] Statements of fact (positive or descriptive statements), which are based upon reason and observation , and examined via the empirical method .
In some cases, a previous dissent is used to spur a change in the law, and a later case may result in a majority opinion adopting a particular understanding of the law formerly advocated in dissent. As with concurring opinions, the difference in opinion between dissents and majority opinions can often illuminate the precise holding of the ...