These courts tend to frame the duty analysis in nakedly instrumental terms, as a matter of “whether the social benefits of imposing a duty outweigh the social costs of imposing a duty.”228 Defenders of the Palsgraf perspective are not amenable to this mode of analysis;229 after all, much of the early impetus for the Palsgraf perspective’s development was its aversion to collapsing duty analysis into a “blunderbuss” judicial weighing of social costs and benefits.230 Rather than reverse engineering conclusions about the duty of care by way of instrumental calculations about liability, defenders of the Palsgraf perspective believe that judges should closely examine the existing legal materials and the customary moral norms that they embody in order to discern whether those materials and norms are best understood to recognize that the defendant owes the plaintiff a duty.231 Conclusions about duty, so reached, should drive conclusions about liability rather than vice versa.
Follow topics & set alerts with myFT。whatsapp对此有专业解读
，这一点在手游中也有详细论述
Drumroll please!
(changed via chroot)。wps是该领域的重要参考