Graduate studies at Western
|Abstract||In the first part of my essay I will argue that there is a strong relationship between our view of authority and the desirability of preemptive reasons. More specifically, we have strong reasons to regard legal norms as preemptive reasons only if we accept the service conception of authority. I suggest, however, that an alternative account of authority - which I shall call the arbitrator model - gives us a better account of what legal authority demands and how it works. In the second part of my essay I suggest that we should recast the debate between Dworkinian law as integrity and normative positivism as a debate between two different attempts to put flesh on the bones of the arbitrator model of authority.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Only published papers are available at libraries|
Similar books and articles
Wim de Muijnck (2011). Normative Authority for Empirical Science. Philosophical Explorations 14 (3):263-275.
Joseph Raz (1979). The Authority of Law: Essays on Law and Morality. Oxford University Press.
Daniel Star & Candice Delmas (2011). Three Conceptions of Practical Authority. Jurisprudence 2 (1):143-160.
Scott Hershovitz (2011). The Role of Authority. Philosophers' Imprint 11 (7).
Bas van der Vossen (2011). Assessing Law's Claim to Authority. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 31 (3):481-501.
B. Roermund (2000). Authority and Authorisation. Law and Philosophy 19 (2):201-222.
Jon Garthoff (2010). Legitimacy is Not Authority. Law and Philosophy 29 (6):669-694.
Peter Rijpkema (2011). The Inevitability of Moral Evaluation. Ratio Juris 24 (4):413-434.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads9 ( #122,562 of 738,450 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #61,778 of 738,450 )
How can I increase my downloads?