Questions sur le livre II des Sentences.

Au fol. 160v, traité encyclopédique sur les sciences.

Final Report: Outcomes of Mandatory Minimum Sentences for Drug Traffickers, October 2011

Individuals with disabilities have civil rights protection similar to that provided to individuals on the basis of race, sex, national origin, and religion. The advent of the Americans with Disabilities Act has improved these protections and brought this issue into the forefront. This book is not intended to be a legal translation of state or federal laws. Its purpose is to assist people with disabilities in understanding their rights. Please consult the Code of Iowa, the appropriate federal laws or an attorney if you need a legal interpretation.

The relativity of evaluative sentences: disagreeing over disagreement

Evaluative sentences (moral judgments, expressions of taste, epistemic modals) are relative to the speaker's standards. Lately, a phenomenon has challenged the traditional explanation of this relativity: whenever two speakers disagree over them they contradict each other without being at fault. Hence, it is thought that the correction of the assertions involved must be relative to an unprivileged standard not necessarily the speaker's. I will claim instead that so far, neither this nor any other proposal has provided an explanation of the phenomenon. I will point out several problems presented by them and I will hint to how this phenomenon could be explained by making minor adjustments to our semantic theory.

(Arrêt du conseil d'état qui casse et annulle les sentences et ordonnances rendues par les quatre services du Chatelet au sujet de la condamnation d'un écrit ayant pour titre, Seconde lettre de M. l'archevêque de *** en réponse à la lettre d'un conseiller au parlement.)

[Acte. 1752-11-12. Versailles]