Skip to main content
Log in

The Place of Legal Positivism in Contemporary Constitutional States

  • Published:
Law and Philosophy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The aim of the paper is that of discussing some recent antipositivist theses, with specific reference to the arguments that focus on the alleged incapability of legal positivism to understand and explain the complex normative structure of constitutional states. One of the central tenets of legal positivism (in its guise of “methodological” or “conceptual” positivism) is the theory of the separation between law and morality. On the assumption that in contemporary legal systems, constitutional law represents a point of intersection between law and basic moral values, antipositivists contrast legal positivism with two main arguments. First, on a more general level, the positivist theory of the separation between law and morality is questioned; then, and consequently, the “neutrality thesis” in the juristic study of law is rejected. The author discusses both these antipositivist arguments, and offers a brief defence of methodological positivism.

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

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Pino, G. The Place of Legal Positivism in Contemporary Constitutional States. Law and Philosophy 18, 513–536 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1006339509537

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1006339509537

Navigation