Michael Saltman – författare

Judges in most societies often resort to resolving disputes by means of applying a criterion of reasonableness. In The Demise of the'Reasonable Man' Michael Saltman explores the ways in which reasonableness varies from one legal culture to another, defined by the relative presence or absence of centralized political power.In non-politically centralized societies, Saltman says, judges seek meanings underlying human behavior, and try to place reasonableness within a societal and cultural context. This is possible because primitive societies are relatively homogenous in their values and tend towards consensus when determining what constitutes reasonable behavior. In contrast, modern judges resort to standards of reasonableness only when the legal standard is unclear. Saltman contrasts judges in politically centralized societies, who, in the absence of such consensus, have the authority to determine, on the basis of that authority, what constitutes reasonableness. This rich volume references case studies drawn from ethnographic fieldwork, historical sources, and law reports to demonstrate differences in judicial attitudes toward reasonableness.

Judges in most societies often resort to resolving disputes by means of applying a criterion of reasonableness. In The Demise of the'Reasonable Man' Michael Saltman explores the ways in which reasonableness varies from one legal culture to another, defined by the relative presence or absence of centralized political power.In non-politically centralized societies, Saltman says, judges seek meanings underlying human behavior, and try to place reasonableness within a societal and cultural context. This is possible because primitive societies are relatively homogenous in their values and tend towards consensus when determining what constitutes reasonable behavior. In contrast, modern judges resort to standards of reasonableness only when the legal standard is unclear. Saltman contrasts judges in politically centralized societies, who, in the absence of such consensus, have the authority to determine, on the basis of that authority, what constitutes reasonableness. This rich volume references case studies drawn from ethnographic fieldwork, historical sources, and law reports to demonstrate differences in judicial attitudes toward reasonableness.

In the past, territorial conflict usually involved major powers seeking hegemony over strategic spaces and resources. More recently, however, the decline of opposing global power blocs has elevated ethnicity to a prime cause of conflict over land. This book considers the multiple roles ethnicity plays in fostering territorial conflicts, both violent and non-violent, across the globe. While land disputes relating to nationalism have resulted in the loss of human life in some regions, in others ties between ethnicity and land are asserted more peacefully. Nationalism and challenges to the validity of the links between people and places have caused widespread bloodshed in the disputed territory of Palestine, involving competing claims of Arabs and Jews, have led to war. In North America, however, indigenous Indians' claims to land are settled in the courts, rather than through violence. This book shows how human behaviour is affected by the multiple ways in which people identify with land, topography and natural resources. In doing so, it highlights the growing trend towards defining physical space in specific ethnic contexts, associated with a contemporary world that facilitates global movement.