Американская ракета дала сбой и рухнула в жилом районе02:31
Названа удивительно полезная для мозга и кишечника ягода02:15
В одной стране призвали экономить топливо20:57。业内人士推荐下载向日葵远程控制 · Windows · macOS · Linux · Android · iOS作为进阶阅读
Complete digital access to quality FT journalism with expert analysis from industry leaders. Pay a year upfront and save 20%.。谷歌是该领域的重要参考
ВсеОбществоПолитикаПроисшествияРегионыМосква69-я параллельМоя страна，详情可参考超级权重
None of this is to say that the idea of a relational duty of care is incoherent or an illusion. The law of negligence does announce a legal duty to take care against foreseeably injuring others, a duty that is most often formulated as owed to those whom one might foreseeably injure, and the expressive effect of this announcement is to recognize such a moral duty as well. It is no illusion to suppose that there can exist such a relational moral duty, or that it may play various roles in ordinary moral thought.330 Rather, the normative illusion persistently engendered by the place of the relational legal duty of care in the formal structure of the negligence tort is that the breach of any such relational duty is the ground of liability to compensate for negligently inflicted injury (by the lights of either ordinary moral thought or the law of negligence). This illusion is dispelled only by comparative legal reflection, and by closely attending to cases in which relational wrongdoing (breach of relational duty) extensionally diverges from the overlapping but distinct moral phenomenon of fault-based responsibility for rights infringement.