English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Hart's "Ascription of Responsibility and Rights" is where we find perhaps the first clear pronouncement of defeasibility and the technical introduction of the term. The paper has been criticised, disavowed, and never quite fully redeemed. Its lurid history is now being used as an excuse for dismissing the importance of defeasibility. Quite to the contrary, Hart's introduction of defeasibility has uniformly been regarded as the most agreeable part of the paper. The critics' wish that defeasibility could be better expounded has largely been fulfilled. Even the most contentious part of the paper, Hart's claim that the ascription of acts implies responsibility, is not as mistaken as some have taken it to be. The paper remains a paragon of clarity in the important and active scholarly area that crosses legal reasoning, language, and logic.

Hart's critics on defeasible concepts and ascriptivism