Reflection on the Research Status of Digital Jurisprudence
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.54097/1bm28767Keywords:
Digital Jurisprudence; Digital Technology; Artificial Intelligence.Abstract
At present, digital technology is developing rapidly, digital technology has penetrated into all aspects of social life, economic life and cultural life. Law is a wide range of disciplines, involving many fields, including both public law and private law. Therefore, digital technology will inevitably touch on many aspects of the field of law and have a huge impact. For example, digital technology is applicable to the field of personal information. From the four stages of collection, storage, classification and use of personal information, it is necessary to play the role of legal protection and regulation. The content of digital jurisprudence is characterized by fast update speed and wide coverage. This background determines the necessity and importance of changing traditional law and establishing digital jurisprudence. However, the current digital jurisprudence is in its infancy, many concepts have not been fully determined, many boundaries have not been fully divided, and there is a lack of clear goals for progress. The purpose of this paper is to further clarify the concept of digital jurisprudence from the perspective of vertical and horizontal intersection, divide clear boundaries, and clearly set goals, so as to lay a solid foundation and inject vitality into the development of digital jurisprudence.
Downloads
References
[1] See Peter Huber, “The Old-New Division in Risk Regulation”, 69 Virginia Law Review 1025,1025-1028(1983); Elizabeth Fisher, Risk Regulation and Administrative Constitutionalism, Hart Publishing, 2007.
[2] See John C. P. Goldberg, “Twentieth-Century Tort Theory”, 91 Georgetown Law Journal 513, 513-560(2003).
[3] See Neal Katyal, “Disruptive Technologies and the Law”, 102 Georgetown Law Journal 1685, 1685-1689(2014).
[4] See Gary E. Marchant et al, The Growing Gap Between Emerging Technologies and Legal-Ethical Oversight: The Pacing Problem, Springer Publishing Company, 2013.
[5] See Anupam Chander, “Future-Proofing Law”, 51 UC Davis Law Review 1, 1-25 (2017).
[6] See Ludwig Wittgenstein, Philosophical Investigations, translated by G. E. M. Anscombe, Macmillan, 1958, pp.20-32.
Downloads
Published
Conference Proceedings Volume
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Journal of Education, Humanities and Social Sciences
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.