By contrast, philosophical formalists such as Professors Arthur Ripstein and Ernest Weinrib believe that tort law’s gallery of relational legal wrongs together encodes one overarching sort of relational moral wrong, the wrong of acting as another person’s master, by violating that person’s equal freedom to set their own ends — either by using that person’s means (that is, his body or property) without his consent,71 or by imposing on that person an abnormal risk of damage to his means.72 Thus, philosophical formalists are inclined to monism where pragmatic constructivists are inclined to pluralism. Unsurprisingly, philosophical formalists’ interpretive enterprise is far from philosophically quietist. Their aim is to elucidate the unified relational moral wrong of acting as another person’s master by reference to Kantian and Aristotelian philosophy, and thereby to defend it not only as an understanding of the law but also as a first-order normative view of how tort law ought to operate.73
[&:first-child]:overflow-hidden [&:first-child]:max-h-full"
，详情可参考爱思助手
Navigating these trade-offs is engineering. If you’re navigating those trade-offs to produce software, you’re doing software engineering. If you’re not considering these trade-offs, you’re just going on vibes and what you produce will be something between accidentally useful and extremely harmful.，更多细节参见谷歌
Continue reading...