David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Ratio Juris 22 (3):326-338 (2009)
In this paper, I present a new argument against inclusive legal positivism. As I show, any theory which permits morality to be a condition on legality cannot account for a core feature of legal activity, namely, that it is an activity of social planning. If the aim of a legal institution is to guide the conduct of the community through plans, it would be self-defeating if the existence of these plans could only be determined through deliberation on the merits. I also argue that, insofar as inclusive legal positivism was developed as a response to Ronald Dworkin's critique of H. L. A. Hart's theory of law, it was founded on a mistake. For once we appreciate the role that planning plays in legal regulation, we will see that Dworkin's objection is based on a flawed conception of legal obligations and rights and hence does not present an objection that inclusive legal positivists were required to answer.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
H. L. A. Hart (1994). The Concept of Law. Oxford University Press.
Michael Bratman (1987/1999). Intention, Plans, and Practical Reason. Center for the Study of Language and Information.
Jules L. Coleman (2001). The Practice of Principle: In Defence of a Pragmatist Approach to Legal Theory. Oxford University Press.
Scott J. Shapiro (2007). The "Hart-Dworkin" Debate : A Short Guide for the Perplexed. In Arthur Ripstein (ed.), Ronald Dworkin. Cambridge University Press 22--49.
Citations of this work BETA
Miguel-Jose Lopez-Lorenzo (2012). The Planning Theory of Law. Res Publica 18 (2):201-206.
John Eekelaar (2012). Positivism and Plural Legal Systems. Ratio Juris 25 (4):513-526.
Similar books and articles
Pedro Rivas (2007). El Sentido de la Teoría Jurídica Del Inclusive Legal Positivism. In Josep J. Moreso (ed.), Legal Theory: Legal Positivism and Conceptual Analysis: Proceedings of the 22nd Ivr World Congress, Granada 2005, Volume I = Teoría Del Derecho: Positivismo Jurídico y Análisis Conceptual. Franz Steiner Verlag
Scott Shapiro (2011). Legality. Harvard University Press.
F. Atria (1999). Legal Reasoning and Legal Theory Revisited. Law and Philosophy 18 (5):537-577.
R. Escudero Alday (2007). Arguments Against Inclusive Legal Positivism. In Josep J. Moreso (ed.), Legal Theory: Legal Positivism and Conceptual Analysis: Proceedings of the 22nd Ivr World Congress, Granada 2005, Volume I = Teoría Del Derecho: Positivismo Jurídico y Análisis Conceptual. Franz Steiner Verlag
Robert Alexy (2008). On the Concept and the Nature of Law. Ratio Juris 21 (3):281-299.
Francois Chevrette & Hugo Cyr, Legal Positivism? What Are You Talking About? ('De Quel Positivisme Parlez-Vous?').
Mario Jori (ed.) (1992). Legal Positivism. New York University Press.
Thom Brooks (2007). Between Natural Law and Legal Positivism: Dworkin and Hegel on Legal Theory. Georgia State University Law Review 23 (3):513-60.
Wilfrid J. Waluchow (1994). Inclusive Legal Positivism. Oxford University Press.
Vittorio Villa (2009). Inclusive Legal Positivism, Legal Interpretation, and Value-Judgments. Ratio Juris 22 (1):110-127.
Added to index2009-08-27
Total downloads148 ( #11,828 of 1,724,892 )
Recent downloads (6 months)4 ( #167,174 of 1,724,892 )
How can I increase my downloads?