David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Ratio Juris 24 (2):194-246 (2011)
According to the received opinion there is a theoretical incompatibility between Herbert Hart's The Concept of Law and Alf Ross's On Law and Justice, and, according to the received opinion, it stems above all from Hart's emphasis on the internal point of view. The present paper argues that this reading is mistaken. The Concept of Law does not go beyond On Law and Justice in so far as both present arguments to the effect that law is based on a shared understanding between participants in a project perceived by every participant to be a project in common. The paper demonstrates that there are substantive parallels between Hart's combination of “acceptance” or “acknowledgement” and a “critical reflective attitude” and Ross's combination of “motivation” or “feeling” and a “coherent whole of meaning and motivation.” The main conclusion is that the views of norms and normativity put forward in The Concept of Law and On Law and Justice are very close in essential respects, and, more specifically, that the two works are at root identical in their representation of the basis of normativity in reality
|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
J. L. Austin (1979). Philosophical Papers. Oxford University Press.
Jules L. Coleman (1998). Incorporationism, Conventionality, and the Practical Difference Thesis. Legal Theory 4 (4):381-425.
Ronald Dworkin (2006). Justice in Robes. Belknap Press.
Svein Eng (2000). Fusion of Descriptive and Normative Propositions. The Concepts of 'Descriptive Proposition' and 'Normative Proposition' as Concepts of Degree. Ratio Juris 13 (3):236-260.
Kent Greenawalt (1988). Hart's Rule of Recognition and the United States. Ratio Juris 1 (1):40-57.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
John Gardner (2011). Hart on Legality, Justice and Morality. Jurisprudence 1 (2):253-265.
Danny Priel (2008). Sanction and Obligation in Hart's Theory of Law. Ratio Juris 21 (3):404-411.
Jules L. Coleman (ed.) (2001). Hart's Postscript: Essays on the Postscript to the Concept of Law. Oxford University Press.
Matthew H. Kramer (2013). In Defense of Hart. In Wil Waluchow & Stefan Sciaraffa (eds.), Philosophical Foundations of the Nature of Law. Oup Oxford. 22.
H. L. A. Hart (1994). The Concept of Law. Oxford University Press.
Matthew H. Kramer (ed.) (2008). The Legacy of H.L.A. Hart: Legal, Political, and Moral Philosophy. Oxford University Press.
Philip Schofield (2011). Jeremy Bentham and HLA Hart's 'Utilitarian Tradition in Jurisprudence'. Jurisprudence 1 (2):147-167.
David-Hillel Ruben (1972). Positive and Natural Law Revisited. Modern Schoolman 49 (May):295-317.
Alf Ross (1958/2004). On Law and Justice. London, Stevens.
Leslie Green (2008). Positivism And The Inseparability Of Law And Morals. New York University Law Review 83:1035--1058.
Frederick Schauer (2010). Was Austin Right After All? On the Role of Sanctions in a Theory of Law. Ratio Juris 23 (1):1-21.
Mark J. Bennett (2011). Hart and Raz on the Non-Instrumental Moral Value of the Rule of Law: A Reconsideration. [REVIEW] Law and Philosophy 30 (5):603-635.
Timothy A. O. Endicott (1998). Herbert Hart and the Semantic Sting. Legal Theory 4 (3):283-300.
Added to index2011-05-12
Total downloads11 ( #194,000 of 1,696,514 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #342,645 of 1,696,514 )
How can I increase my downloads?