Graduate studies at Western
Ratio Juris 22 (1):62-73 (2009)
|Abstract||This paper deals with the possibility of faultless disagreement in law. It does this by looking to other spheres in which faultless disagreement appears to be possible, mainly in matters of taste and ethics. Three possible accounts are explored: the realist account, the relativist account, and the expressivist account. The paper tries to show that in the case of legal disagreements, there is a place for an approach that can take into account our intuitions in the sense that legal disagreements are genuine and at times faultless.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Kenneth M. Ehrenberg (2011). The Anarchist Official: A Problem for Legal Positivism. Australian Journal of Legal Philosophy 36:89-112.
Scott Shapiro (2011). Legality. Harvard University Press.
Vittorio Villa (2009). Inclusive Legal Positivism, Legal Interpretation, and Value-Judgments. Ratio Juris 22 (1):110-127.
Scott J. Shapiro (2009). Was Inclusive Legal Positivism Founded on a Mistake? Ratio Juris 22 (3):326-338.
F. Atria (1999). Legal Reasoning and Legal Theory Revisited. Law and Philosophy 18 (5):537-577.
Robert P. George (ed.) (1996). The Autonomy of Law: Essays on Legal Positivism. Oxford University Press.
Mario Jori (ed.) (1992). Legal Positivism. New York University Press.
Added to index2009-02-12
Total downloads43 ( #30,837 of 739,358 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #61,680 of 739,358 )
How can I increase my downloads?