Ratio Juris 24 (2):156-193 (2011)
|Abstract||I argue in this article (i) that Karl Olivecrona's legal philosophy, especially the critique of the view that law has binding force, the analysis of the concept and function of a legal rule, and the idea that law is a matter of organized force, is a significant contribution to twentieth century legal philosophy. I also argue (ii) that Olivecrona fails to substantiate some of his most important empirical claims, and (iii) that the distinction espoused by Olivecrona between the truth and the correctness of legal statements is problematic but not needed in Olivecrona's legal philosophy|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Aulis Aarnio (1978). Legal Point of View: Six Essays on Legal Philosophy. Helsingin Yliopisto.
Torben Spaak (2009). Karl Olivecrona on Judicial Law-Making. Ratio Juris 22 (4):483-498.
Martin P. Golding (2005). Rights, Performatives, and Promises in Karl Olivecrona's Legal Theory. Ratio Juris 18 (1):16-29.
Karl Olivecrona (1948). Is a Sociological Explanation of Law Possible? Theoria 14 (2):167-207.
Thomas Mautner (2010). Some Myth About Realism. Ratio Juris 23 (3):411-427.
Karl Olivecrona (1971). Law as Fact. London,Stevens.
Wouter de Been (2008). Legal Realism Regained: Saving Realism From Critical Acclaim. Stanford Law Books.
Karl Olivecrona (1974). Locke's Theory of Appropriation. Philosophical Quarterly 24 (96):220-234.
H. L. A. Hart (1955). Inquiries Into the Nature of Law and Morals. By Axel Hagerstrsm. Edited by Karl Olivecrona. Translated by C. D. Broad. (Stockholm, Almquist and Wiksell. Pp. Xxxi + 377. Price Sw. Cr. 25.00.). [REVIEW] Philosophy 30 (115):369-.
Added to index2009-04-23
Total downloads40 ( #33,678 of 722,744 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #36,437 of 722,744 )
How can I increase my downloads?