Free proof, epistemic justification, and the noble dream of standards of proof

Abstract

To establish objective standards of proof for the guidance of judicial decisions is one of the greatest yearnings of legal epistemology. Among the proposals, one of the most well-received seems to be that of those who suggest fixing the standards by using parameters of epistemic justification. This paper argues that this enterprise is unfeasible, making explicit the reasons for this unfeasibility. In any case, a revaluation of these proposals is suggested even if with a more circumscribed utility.