Talk:Public liability

Asia

"In Asia, the law has not developed to the same extent, although the law does recognise negligence. Most professionals[who?] are predicting this development to occur rapidly and within the next ten years."

What a disgustingly sweeping statement this is! Asia has 4.4 billion people and at least 48 different countries. 48 different jurisdictions and more. Is there any basis for claiming that "Asia's" law of negligence is undeveloped? Which of the 48 jurisdictions are you referring to when you claim that "the law does recognise negligence".

Aside from being utterly meaningless, this paragraph reeks of Euro-American condescension. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.6.196.205 (talk) 14:29, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

Status of public liability.

If liability is not observable in a state of affairs, then it arises by ascription or utterance. Simply ascribing (i.e. writing to - from the Latin 'ad scribere') liability to B doesn't establish the state of affairs where B is liable and therefore doesn't establish the truth of the sentence 'B is liable' just as simply saying "The cat is sitting on the mat" doesn't establish the state of affairs where the cat is sitting on the mat and therefore doesn't establish the truth of the sentence 'The cat is sitting on the mat'. The process is one of magical incantation i.e. saying it's so makes it so. Ash121.220.199.199 (talk) 12:27, 26 August 2012 (UTC)