judgment

(redirected from judgement)
Also found in: Dictionary, Thesaurus, Legal, Financial, Idioms, Encyclopedia, Wikipedia.
Related to judgement: judgment

judgment

 [juj´ment]
the ability to make logical, rational decisions and decide whether a given action is right or wrong.
clinical judgment the process by which the nurse decides on data to be collected about a client, makes an interpretation of the data, arrives at a nursing diagnosis, and identifies appropriate nursing actions; this involves problem solving, decision making, and critical thinking.

judgment

[juj′mənt]
Etymology: L, judicare, to judge
1 (in law) the final decision of the court regarding the case before it.
2 the reason given by the court for its decision; an opinion.
3 an award, penalty, or other sentence of law given by the court.
4 the ability to recognize the relationships of ideas and to form correct conclusions from those data as well as from those acquired from experience.

judg·ment

(jŭj'mĕnt)
Ability to evaluate the positive and negative aspects of a behavior or situation and act or react appropriately.
Compare: discrimination
Synonym(s): judgement.

judg·ment

(jŭj'mĕnt)
Ability to evaluate aspects of a behavior or situation and act or react appropriately.
Synonym(s): judgement.

judgment,

n 1. a legal finding.
n 2. the ability to discriminate between or among two or more states or conditions.
References in periodicals archive ?
But `the judgement of taste requires the agreement of everyone, and he who describes anything as beautiful claims that everyone ought to give his approval to the object in question and also describe it as beautiful' (p.
We formulate the judgement by speaking as if beauty were a property of the object--that is, as though the judgement were a determinant one.
For if any candidate for a negative judgement of taste were to lack this universal validity, it would then not be a judgement of taste at all, but rather a judgement of mere displeasure.
But a judgement of taste, since it is made independently of objective concepts, cannot lay claim to this.
That is, how can a purely subjective judgement lay claim to universality at all?
That is, if all judging subjects ought to arrive at the same judgement, then there must be some determining ground of the judgement which they can all share.
According to Kant, it follows that what is universally communicable in the judgement of taste, and what is thereby the source of its universal validity, is simply the state of mind of the subject.
Again, it is clear that a corresponding argument can be made about the negative judgement of taste.
An earlier question was how a judgement which is undetermined by concepts could lay claim to universal validity.
In 1994, after Hughes appealed the accounting trial court's damages determination to the Federal Circuit, the Government sought to re-open the 1983 liability judgement on the ground that an intervening change in the patent law doctrine of equivalents had rendered that judgement invalid.
On March 12, 1997 Judge Gallagher ruled from the bench and granted SLI's motion for partial summary judgement.