Abstract
The problem which will lead us through all seven chapters of this book sets off here with a forceful metaphor of Iacoviello1, but what hypothesis are we talking about?
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Note that, in logic, the structure of a conditional proposition does not need to specify that it “is true”; that is to say the same phrase would normally be written: “If X, then Y” with the implicit consideration that both event X and event Y are true. Nevertheless, to avoid any incomprehension we presently prefer to integrate the text by adding the specific unnecessary phrase “is true.”
- 2.
We speak about the interpretation and not merely the collection of traces because as they grow in complexity they will need an agent capable of interpreting them, the field expert, who will be able to give them a consistent explanation. This is the delicate passage that enables us to turn the traces into evidence. If you think about the simple example of Person’s fingerprints or, even more banal, the manufacture of his passport, you will see that both the fingerprint and the photograph on the passport are to be considered elements that can testify Person’s “presence” in a place. However, only an expert witness is able to evaluate potential efforts in falsification on one or the other element.
- 3.
K. L. Carper ed., Forensic Engineering, 2nd ed., CRC Press, Boca Raton 2001.
- 4.
R. K. Noon, Forensic Engineering Investigation, CRC Press, Boca Raton 2001.
- 5.
Notice that we are talking here of mathematical methods which are not to be confused with scientific methods, even if we consider that mathematics permeates any enquiry of a scientific nature. It is obvious that all scientific disciplines have to do with “laws” that are formulated more often than not using instruments of a mathematical nature (it is enough to think of the universal laws of gravitation elaborated by Newton). Later in the book we will attempt to clarify the subtle distinction that exists between mathematical and scientific methods. To do that, however, we need to first introduce a new form of reasoning which is not simply deductive.
- 6.
Euclid begins from an axiomatic system based on definitions (e.g., “a point is that which has no parts”; “a line is length without width,” etc.) common notions (e.g., “things which equal the same thing equal one another”) which are not directly connected with geometry, and postulates (e.g., “postulate: you can conduct a straight line from one point to any other point”) which, instead, have to do with geometry. On the basis of this axiomatic system organized around carefully chosen definitions, common notions and postulates, Euclid deduces the geometrical theories that are still studied in High Schools today.
- 7.
George Boole 1815–1864, logician and mathematician is considered to be the founder of mathematical logics. Boole was the first to study logical deductions formulated in natural language through a formal language called, in fact, Boole’s Algebraic Language or Boolean Algebra. Even easier to remember are the “symbols” introduced by Eulero in 1787 (L. Eulero, Letters to a German Princess, Ferres, Naples, 1787) to carry out logical “operations” in a symbolic but easily intuitive fashion. These are the “rings” inside which the “sets” are represented, i.e., classes of types with determined characteristics. For example, if we are to represent the main premise in Aristotle’s syllogism “all men are mortal” we would draw the ring representing the class “men” in a larger circle representing the class “mortal beings.” The minor premise “Socrates is a man” means in the theory of sets that “Socrates” is an element of the set “men.” It follows that because he is certainly included inside the wider circle, we can deduce that the element Socrates is equipped with the same particularities as the set “mortal beings”: thus he is himself unequivocally mortal.
- 8.
A. Einsten, Induktion und Deduktion in der Physik, in Berliner Tageblatt, 25 December 1919.
- 9.
And here again Galileo constructed a system, the inclined plane (which we will discuss later in greater detail in Chap. 3) to carry out experiments in a simplified, controlled “environment,” to interpret the results and thus to produce inferences on the observations.
- 10.
C. S. Peirce, Collected Papers, edited by C. H. Hartshorne and P. P. Weiss, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, 1965.
- 11.
Cf. the further details in C. S. Peirce, Deduction, Induction and Hypothesis in C. S. Peirce, The Essential Peirce, edited by N. Houser and C. J. W. Kloesel, Indiana University Press, 1992.
- 12.
In this text Peirce still uses the word hypothesis to formulate the alternative type of reasoning to the classical logical deductive or inductive scheme. In the following manuscripts, he starts to use the word abduction, instead of hypothesis.
- 13.
We cannot yet speak of the acceleration of gravity: this will be one of the exceptional results of Galileo’s experiments.
- 14.
As we have said, in fact, the scientific method is an iterative cyclical process that results in the progressive acquisition of knowledge.
- 15.
It is right to talk in this way about the machines produced by man, at least since the Enlightenment and specifically in the wake of the scientific method introduced by Galileo.
- 16.
Think of Franklin, Faraday and Hertz’s discovery of the principles of electricity, then used by EDISON (1847–1931) and his competitor TESLA (1856–1943) for the electric illumination of streets and houses.
- 17.
For greater information on the question, cf. the volume Popper, Karl, Conjectures and Refutations. The Growth of Scientific Knowledge. London and New York: Routledge Classics (2002 [1963]). In any case, we consider that it will be useful here to clarify the general picture of why such a gross mistake is made.
- 18.
For example: when we observe a particular result obtained in certain examined conditions, we then conclude that every experiment carried out in the same conditions will probably give us the same result.
- 19.
It is a good thing to specify here that we are talking about a pure inductivist approach to distinguish that from the inductive phase which we spoke about earlier when we were explaining the complex type of thinking carried out in the scientific approach. In fact, scientific methods of thinking also include an inductive phase, consisting in the verification (often through experimentation) that the theory formulated during the abductive phase really is valid.
- 20.
The explosion of the Space Shuttle Challenger, which took place on 28 January 1986 a few seconds after takeoff is without doubt the most serious accident in the history of the American Space Agency.
- 21.
EDMOND LOCARD (1877–1966) better known as the Sherlock Holmes of France. A pioneer of forensic science, in 1910 Locard founded the first scientific police laboratory in Lyon. For further information, see, J. Chisum, An Introduction to Crime Reconstruction in B. Turvey, Criminal Profiling: An Introduction to Behavioral Evidence Analysis, London Academic Press, London 1999.
- 22.
Think of the objective impossibility of obtaining substantial traces because the dynamic of the accident took place over a large area, or because the area itself is not accessible. This is the situation in the case of the disaster of the Space Shuttle Challenger in 1986, which exploded in flight, scattering pieces over a vast area; or for historical cases nearer to our own times, like the “Ustica Disaster, the Itavia Flight 870” or the “Moby Prince Ship Disaster.” As regards the Ustica Disaster many of the pieces of evidence where held in custody at the bottom of the sea until such a time as it was technically possible to salvage them; in the case of the Moby Prince, the fire that caused the death of 140 passengers also cancelled most of the traces that would have been of relevant interest. To tell the whole story, it is interesting to remember that in the case of the Challenger the accident was reconstructed perfectly thanks to the photographic documentation and film footage that the investigators had at their disposal. They were, in fact, able to isolate the moment when the explosion of the spaceship was “triggered.” From that photo still, the American physicist, Feynman, a member of the Government Commission of Inquiry, was able to trace the origin of the explosion to the probable breakage of a washer in the bottom segment of the solid fuel rocket.
- 23.
For example, the traces of braking left on the asphalt and the presence of pieces of tire material found in determinate positions as well as the trajectory the vehicle has taken after the event, allow us, when they are interpreted correctly, to reconstruct the event in question—explosion of a tire. Further analysis, given by the layout of the parts of tire material that we have found at a certain distance from the first traces of braking could amplify our knowledge of the phenomenon: we could infer, for example, that the explosion took place chronologically previous to the use of the car brakes and not vice versa. The explosion of the tire represents the phenomenon which took place in a certain instant of time and which is responsible for the car + driver system in normal driving conditions having passed into a skidding condition with the loss of control of the car.
- 24.
H, Gross, Criminal Investigations, Sweet & Maxwell, London 1924.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2016 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
D’Errico, F., Casa, M.D. (2016). On Judicial and Evidential Reasoning in the Field of Industrial Accidents. In: The Sequence of Event Analysis in Criminal Trials. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-47898-1_1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-47898-1_1
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-662-47897-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-662-47898-1
eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)