Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Taking Law Seriously: Starting Points of the Hart/Devlin Debate*

  • Published:
The Journal of Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The famous mid-20th century debate between Patrick Devlin and Herbert Hart about the relationship between law and morality addressed the limits of the criminal law in the context of a proposal by the Wolfenden Committee to decriminalize male homosexual activity in private. The original exchanges and subsequent contributions to the debate have been significantly constrained by the terms in which the debate was framed: a focus on criminal law in general and sexual offences in particular; a preoccupation with the so-called “harm principle,” a sharp delineation of the realms of law and morality, and a static conception of the relationship between them. This article explores the limitations imposed by these various starting-points and argues for a holistic and symbiotic understanding of the relationship between law and morality.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Peter Cane.

Additional information

* Thanks to Tony Connolly, Leighton McDonald and Niki Lacey for penetrating and suggestive comments on previous versions.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Cane, P. Taking Law Seriously: Starting Points of the Hart/Devlin Debate*. J Ethics 10, 21–51 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10892-005-4590-x

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10892-005-4590-x

Key words

Navigation