Edmond, G.
(2004)
‘Thick Decisions: Expertise, Advocacy and Reasonableness in the
Federal Court’
, Oceania74(3):
190-230
.
2.
Faigman, D.
(2004) Laboratory of Justice: The Supreme Court’s
200-year-old Struggle to Integrate Social Science and Law.
New York: Faigman
.
3.
Luhmann, N.
(1982) The Differentiation of Society. Trans. S. Holmes
and C. Larmore.
New York: Columbia University Press
.
4.
Nelken, D.
(1987a) ‘Criminal Law and Criminal Justice: Some
Notes on Their Irrelation’, pp. 139-177
in
I. Dennis
(ed.) Criminal Law and Justice.
London: Sweet & Maxwell
.
5.
Nelken, D.
(1987b) ‘Changing Paradigms in the Sociology of
Law’, pp. 191-217 in
G. Teubner
(ed.) Autopoietic Law: A New Approach to Law and Society.
Berlin: de Gruyter
.
6.
Nelken, D.
(1990) ‘The Truth About Law’s
Truth’,
European University Institute Law Department Working Paper,
Florence, Italy
.
7.
Nelken, D.
(1998a) ‘A Just Measure of
Science’, pp. 11-36 in
M. Freeman
. and
H. Reece
(eds) Science in Court.
Dartmouth: Ashgate
.
8.
Nelken, D.
(1998b)
‘Blinding Insights: The Limits of a Reflexive Sociology of Law’
, Journal of Law and Society25(3):
407-426
.
9.
Nelken, D.
(2001)
‘Can Law Learn from Social Science?’
, Israel Law Review2-3:
1-20
.
10.
Rubin, E. L.
(1997)
‘Law and the Methodology of Law’
, Wisconsin Law Review:
521-565
.
11.
Smith, R.
and
B. Wynne
(1989) Expert Evidence: Interpreting Science in the
Law.
London: Routledge
.
12.
Teubner, G.
(1989)
‘How the Law Thinks’
, Law and Society Review23(5):
727-759
.
13.
Valverde, M.
(2003) Law’s Dream of a Common Knowledge.
Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press
.
14.
Waldron, J.
(2000)
‘Transcendental Nonsense and System in the Law’
, Columbia Law Review100:
16-55
.
15.
Wynne, B.
(1989) ‘Establishing the Rules of Laws:
Constructing Expert Authority’, pp.
23-56 in
R. Smith
and
B. Wynne
(eds) Expert Evidence: Interpreting Science in the Law.
London: Routledge
.
