Auteur: Abbot, James C.
Titre: Roman deceit: dolus in Latin literature and Roman society
Lieu èdition: Chapel Hill
Éditeur: University of North Carolina
Annèe edition: 1997
Pages: 221
Mots-clès: Droit - Diritto - Law
Description: Ph.D. thesis. This doctoral dissertation includes one chapter on Cicero and another, concerning dolus in Roman law, that touches on Cicero in several places. The earlier chapter, the one on law, includes brief discussion of passages in de Officiis and in the speeches pro Caecina and pro Tullio. The chapter on Cicero is titled "Cui fit iniuria? Dolus and Cicero’s Moral Philosophy.". Author’s focus there is Cicero’s references to and comments upon dolus malus in Book 3 of de Officiis. This chapter also discusses passages in de Divinatione and the Philippics. The following information, kindly sent by the author gives us a sense of the whole : "In what follows, I consider first a passage from de Divinatione, which presents a debate over responsibility for an alleged act of deception. Though the deception is not a dolus, the passage is nonetheless invaluable, for it is very clear in showing how competing ideas about causation can lead to dramatically different assessments of responsibility for deceptive conduct. Next, I turn to the Philippics, in order to demonstrate Cicero’s fondness for argument based on causation. Then, in the several sections at the heart of this chapter, I assess Cicero’s argument for the immorality of dissimulatio in de Officiis, in which Aquilius Gallus’ edict on dolus malus plays a crucial role. I should think keywords such as these might be adequate: deceit, dolus (malus), causation".
Oeuvres:
Sigle auteur: Abbot 1997
Titre: Roman deceit: dolus in Latin literature and Roman society
Lieu èdition: Chapel Hill
Éditeur: University of North Carolina
Annèe edition: 1997
Pages: 221
Mots-clès: Droit - Diritto - Law
Description: Ph.D. thesis. This doctoral dissertation includes one chapter on Cicero and another, concerning dolus in Roman law, that touches on Cicero in several places. The earlier chapter, the one on law, includes brief discussion of passages in de Officiis and in the speeches pro Caecina and pro Tullio. The chapter on Cicero is titled "Cui fit iniuria? Dolus and Cicero’s Moral Philosophy.". Author’s focus there is Cicero’s references to and comments upon dolus malus in Book 3 of de Officiis. This chapter also discusses passages in de Divinatione and the Philippics. The following information, kindly sent by the author gives us a sense of the whole : "In what follows, I consider first a passage from de Divinatione, which presents a debate over responsibility for an alleged act of deception. Though the deception is not a dolus, the passage is nonetheless invaluable, for it is very clear in showing how competing ideas about causation can lead to dramatically different assessments of responsibility for deceptive conduct. Next, I turn to the Philippics, in order to demonstrate Cicero’s fondness for argument based on causation. Then, in the several sections at the heart of this chapter, I assess Cicero’s argument for the immorality of dissimulatio in de Officiis, in which Aquilius Gallus’ edict on dolus malus plays a crucial role. I should think keywords such as these might be adequate: deceit, dolus (malus), causation".
Oeuvres:
Sigle auteur: Abbot 1997
