Reasons as experiments: Judgment and justification in the "Hard Look"

Research output: Contribution to journalReview articlepeer-review

1 Scopus citations


Arbitrariness review of agency rulemakings has long set "political" influences aside as a special case worthy of special scrutiny. This essay argues that the orthodox account of arbitrariness review in this vein makes some untenable assumptions about both reviewing courts and agencies as agents. If we seek more agency responsiveness to reason rightly defined, then reviewing courts must begin devoting more (scarce) cognitive resources to the monitoring of agencies' behaviors over time. Reviewing courts should encourage agencies to organize themselves in order to learn-by-doing. This will probably entail paying less attention to the separation of law from fact, science from politics, and judgment from justification.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)205-239
Number of pages35
JournalContemporary Pragmatism
Issue number2
StatePublished - Dec 2012

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Philosophy


Dive into the research topics of 'Reasons as experiments: Judgment and justification in the "Hard Look"'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this