Law and Language

Hay una profundidad en la letra, entre las letras, que solo la lectura es capaz de enunciar. Enunciación que evoca la pregunta por la violencia de la palabra misma, su ambición de significar. La letra, en cambio, es un acontecer sutil. No hay escritor ni lector que pueda estrecharla, reducirla, asfixiar su siempre prosódica pulsión. Hay otros signos que la letra codicia -dice Jabes- signos borrados que el gesto reproduce en lo que nombra. El presente trabajo pretende interrogar la tradición (...) de la interpretación jurídica occidental emprendiendo la tarea de una restauración: la de la lectura midrashica como modo otro de interpretación. Como advierte Legendre, el armazón lógico de nuestros sistemas jurídicos sostenido sobre un derecho romano canónico como su representación histórica se instituyó sobre la marca de un silencio: la represión de cualquier sistema de interpretación disonante, juzgados como contrarios a la Razón por la tradición del derecho romano cristianizado. ¿Cómo leer esta censura? He ahí la pregunta fundamental que porta la institución. (shrink)

An important moral category—dishonest speech—has been overlooked in theoretical ethics despite its importance in legal, political, and everyday social exchanges. Discussion in this area has instead been fixated on a binary debate over the contrast between lying and ‘merely misleading’. Some see lying as a distinctive wrong; others see it as morally equivalent to deliberately omitting relevant truths, falsely insinuating, or any other species of attempted verbal deception. Parties to this debate have missed the relevance to their disagreement of the (...) notion of communicative dishonesty. Communicative dishonesty need not take the form of a lie, yet its wrongness does not reduce to the wrongness of seeking to deceive. This paper therefore proposes a major shift of attention away from the lying/misleading debate and towards the topic of communicative dishonesty. Dishonesty is not a simple notion to define, however. It presupposes a difficult distinction between what is and is not expressed in a given utterance. This differs from the more familiar distinction between what is and is not said, the distinction at the heart of the lying/misleading debate. This paper uses an idea central to speech act theory to characterize dishonesty in terms of the utterer’s communicative intentions, and applies the resulting definition to a variety of contexts. (shrink)

La obra de BAJTIN es maravillosamente fragmentaria, se sustrae con gran habilidad a toda sistematización. Sin embargo, la lectura exige irremediablemente alguna suerte de rodeo: leer no es sino recortar. El presente trabajo pretende recorrer parte de estos textos a fin de repensar su productividad jurídica y política; un proyecto filosófico que apunta a revelar la íntima relación entre vida y literatura, entre valor artístico y valor ético. Un proyecto centrado fundamentalmente en las categorías del otro, del diálogo, la polifonía, (...) la risa y la carnavalización. El carnaval (y la carnavalización) son el medio de encarnar la imposibilidad última de todo proyecto totalitario. El carnaval es una forma sincrética de espectáculo ritual que ha elaborado todo un lenguaje de formas simbólicas organizadas bajo categorías de inversión, parodia, desjerarquización, contacto libre y unión de los opuestos. Esta risa ritual encantatoria y mágica se refugia, tras una serie de transformaciones en la llamada “cultura popular” que preserva y reivindica el sentido original de la fiesta ritual. La vida carnavalesca propone así un otro mundo y una otra temporalidad. Una dualidad donde todo se extingue y se vuelve a generar. El carnaval, escribe BAJTIN, es la fiesta del tiempo, que aniquila y renueva todo. Durante el carnaval es la vida misma la que juega e interpreta sin escenario, sin tablado, sin actores, sin espectadores, su propio renacimiento y renovación. -/- . (shrink)

Among the most persuasive arguments against hate speech bans was made by Ronald Dworkin, who warned of the threat to political legitimacy posed by laws that deny those subject to them adequ...

Speech is a major vehicle for enacting and enforcing misogyny, so can counter-speech stop the harms of misogynist speech? This paper starts with a discussion of the nature of misogyny, from Dworkin, MacKinnon, and Frye, up to K. Manne’s new work, here emphasizing the ways that women are attacked or undermined through speech and images. Misogyny becomes toxic when it sharply and steadily limits the life prospects, including daily functioning, of the women it targets. To address the questions of counter-speech, (...) one first needs a robust account of language—it’s power, how it functions, whether it can actually be gainsaid. Once the speech act is issued, can its damage be un-done, or substantially mitigated? To answer this, one must understand the kinds of harms that language achieves, and the kinds of counter-speech available. That is, one needs an understanding of how the speech of misogyny functions, rooted in a theory of how language works. This article offers a brief account of language as a complex set of social practices, which includes the speech of law, and an account of the power and limits of counter-speech. I argue that it is unhelpful to think in terms of free speech vs. censorship. Speech is not completely free, and censorship is a blunt tool. Instead, we should look at the ways that discursive harms are enacted and what kinds of normative changes could minimize the frequency of assault, and which changes might minimize the power of misogyny. (shrink)

En “The King´s two bodies” Kantorowicz explora la ficción legal de los dos cuerpos del Rey: cuerpo mortal y cuerpo político. Ficción en la cual el rey, constituido como persona ficta, trasciende la temporalidad de cualquier cuerpo individual sobre la idea de “dignitas non moritur”. El presente trabajo pretende abordar la lectura de esa dualidad corporal encarnada en el derecho a través de un doble registro: cuerpo textual y cuerpo imaginario, explorando asimismo cómo el discurso jurídico se construye en el (...) marco de dicha simbología y legitimidad. Instituir lo vivo del texto jurídico no puede hacerse más que sobre el rastro de la semiótica misma. Como señala Legendre, la normatividad produce un “Écrit vivant” en perpetua necesidad de interpretación. Es paradójicamente la batalla por la apertura del texto lo que permite la imagen misma de su continuidad. Una crítica de los montajes vividos, de la instancia de la censura que ata y moviliza el discurso jurídico, provee el fondo de una urgencia: el de la tarea iusfilosófica por venir. (shrink)

La literatura de Kafka no es ciertamente complaciente, obliga al lector a releer una y otra vez. El sentido no está dado allí en el texto sino desplazado, porque la única manera que tiene de acontecer es en lo ausente, en lo inacabado. En diálogo con V. Karam, el presente artículo pretende recorrer parte de esa huella, intentando repensar allí la inasibilidad del tiempo, de la ley y de la interpretación.

The literature of Kafka is certainly not complacent, and forces the reader to reread again and again. The sense is not given there in the text but shifted, because the only way that has happened is in what is missing, in the unfinished. In dialogue with V. Karam, the present article aims to go part of that trace, trying to rethink there ethereality of time, law and interpretation.

Some legal philosophers regard the use of deontic language to describe the law as philosophically significant. Joseph Raz argues that it gives rise to ‘the problem of normativity of law’. He develops an account of what he calls ‘detached’ legal statements to resolve the problem. Unfortunately, Raz’s account is difficult to reconcile with the orthodox semantics of deontic language. The article offers a revised account of the distinction between committed and detached legal statements. It argues that deontic statements carry a (...) Gricean generalized conversational implicature to the effect that the rules in question reflect the speaker’s own commitments. Detached legal statements are made when this implicature is either explicitly cancelled or when the conversational context is sufficient to defeat the implicature. I conclude by offering some tentative reflections on the theoretical significance of deontic language in the law. (shrink)

L'importanza del significante non deve far sì che questo sia interpretato come l'unica componente del linguaggio umano, sebbene ne sia una delle più elevate; pur intendendo la comunicazione umana come convenzionale, nel convenire occorre distinguere, tra convenzione essenziale e funzionale: è certo vero che solo nella prima, nel linguaggio come nel diritto, si potrà incontrare il significante, ma nella seconda sono concentrati i molteplici prodotti della prima, che si presentano come precipitati o cristallizzati a seguito di una reazione chimica, che (...) hanno perso sì la dimensione esistenziale, ma hanno conservato origine e natura umane. Così deve essere debitamente considerato anche il ruolo del senso già dato, del significato positivo dei vocaboli: in particolare, proprio nel linguaggio giuridico, politico ed economico, si è sempre manifestato il bisogno di uno specifico vocabolario, se non di un gergo, che risponda con maggior aderenza o efficacia alle esigenze delle argomentazioni trattate. Nel linguaggio giuridico ed economico si può riscontrare una certa omogeneità nelle società complesse contemporanee, una comune tendenza alla generazione (o forse degenerazione) di terminologie e fraseologie esoteriche che si spingono ben al di là delle logiche e necessarie esigenze di specializzazione, somigliando più a gerghi approssimativi (ad esempio il legalese, per gli anglofoni, assume sempre più la fisionomia di un vero e proprio slang) che ad appropriati e scientifici codici comunicativi. Un fenomeno comune a tali linguaggi è il frequente ricorso alle sigle, abbreviazioni o acronimi, il cui uso generalizzato conduce spesso ad effetti in contraddizione con la loro causa originaria: espedienti linguistici apparentemente coniati allo scopo di migliorare, velocizzare ed estendere la comprensione di termini e concetti complessi, al contrario, generano frequentemente confusione e misunderstanding al di fuori del loro specializzato e ristretto ambito di provenienza e, qualche volta, anche all’interno. Un'adeguata risposta alla proliferazione e diffusione di nuove e sommarie terminologie, abbreviazioni e slogan, che solo apparentemente arricchiscono il lessico, restringendo sempre più, al contrario, l'ambito della convenzione essenziale, potrebbe essere forse ottenuta solo attraverso il recupero della dimensione ontologica del linguaggio, mantenendone sì l'elevato grado di specializzazione, ma non rinunciando per questo alla ricchezza espressiva tanto dei vocaboli quanto della fraseologia. (shrink)

Si analizza lo stretto rapporto tra il diritto (in particolare, il linguaggio giuridico) e la comunicazione fin dall'antichità, segnatamente in relazione al concetto di legittimazione della sovranità; si esaminano alcuni aspetti metodologici comunicativi (in special modo informativi) e giuridici alla luce delle loro prospettive storiche ed economiche. Si presentano ed analizzano alcuni differenti orizzonti comunicativi, quali quelli propri delle scienze economiche e, nelle scienze giuridiche, quelli connessi alla struttura proposizionale e argomentativa del discorso giuridico, con particolare riferimento alle teorie dell'argomentazione (...) di R. Alexy e J. Habermas ed alla possibilità di delineare una procedura regolamentare per assicurarne il controllo di razionalità. La questione centrale affrontata è l'esigenza di conciliare le metodologie comunicative e i caratteri propri del diritto, senza snaturarne le rispettive funzioni. Uno dei nodi fondamentali è costituito dalle condizioni di accessibilità e partecipazione alla comunicazione e all’informazione giuridica, elementi socialmente critici, connessi all'attuazione del principio di eguaglianza in ogni ordinamento giuridico. La distanza tra l'esoterica sfera del linguaggio giuridico e la dimensione concreta dei suoi destinatari, in massima parte soggetti ai quali spesso non ne risulta comprensibile tanto la forma quanto il contenuto (ma non per questo meno coinvolti negli effetti provocati dall'applicazione del diritto), richiede la ricerca di soluzioni complesse ed articolate, non esauribili nella mera applicazione delle pur elaborate e raffinate metodologie comunicative, spesso attuabili senza particolari adattamenti in molti casi di interazione con altre discipline. Infine, si esaminano le ulteriori opportunità offerte dallo sviluppo di nuove tecnologie e dalla loro applicazione al diritto, riscontrandovi la medesima esigenza di appropriate valutazioni e variazioni per il loro adattamento alle particolarità della comunicazione giuridica. (shrink)

The nature of legislative intent remains a subject of vigorous debate. Its many participants perceive the intent in different ways. In this paper, I identify the reason for such diverse perceptions: three intentions are involved in lawmaking, not one. The three intentions correspond to the three aspects of a speech act: locutionary, illocutionary and perlocutionary. The dominant approach in legal theory holds that legislative intent is a semantic one. A closer examination shows that it is, in fact, an illocutionary one. (...) In the paper, I draw the consequences for legal interpretation of this more theorized model of legislative intent. (shrink)

Both the phenomenon of presupposition and that of vagueness have motivated the use of one form or another of trivalent logic, in which a declarative sentence can not only receive the standard values true and false , but also a third, non-standard truth-value which is usually understood as ‘undefined’ . The goal of this paper is to propose a multivalent framework which can deal simultaneously with presupposition and vagueness, and, more specifically, capture their projection properties as well as their different (...) roles in language. Now, there is a prima facie simple way of doing this, which simply consists in assimilating the two phenomena, and using an appropriate type of trivalent logic. On this view, we just need a compositional system that deals with the ‘undefined’ truth-value, and does not care about whether the source of undefinedness is ‘presuppositional’ or related to vagueness. I will argue that such a simple solution cannot succeed, and point out a number of desiderata that any successful approach must meet. I will then present and discuss two seven-valued semantics, inspired, respectively, by the Strong Kleene semantics and by supervaluationism, which meet these desiderata. (shrink)

The process of elaborating EU legislation includes the activity of translation. Drafting and translation cannot be considered separately but are rather two complementary activities whose aim is the quality of legislation. In order to achieve the required quality of legislation, one guiding principle is consistency of terminology. This study examines the particular case of two terms in German that appeared in the EC Treaty: Entscheidung and Beschluss. The inconsistent use of the two terms was the source of interpretative problems, as (...) observed in Case C-370/07 Commission v Council. A comparison of the contested provisions in the EC Treaty and the provisions in the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union shows that the terminological inconsistency has been corrected. After the examination of this case, we elaborate on the impact of terminological consistency on interpretation as reflected in requests for preliminary rulings. (shrink)

The aim of this paper is to retrace the history of genetic patents, analyzing the metaphors used in the public debate, in patent offices, and in courtrooms. I have identified three frames with corresponding metaphor clusters: the first is the industrial frame, built around the idea that DNA is a chemical; the second is the informational frame, assembled around the concept of genetic information; last is the soul frame, based on the idea that DNA is or contains the essence of (...) the individual. (shrink)

Name der Zeitschrift: Studies in Logic, Grammar and Rhetoric Jahrgang: 45 Heft: 1 Seiten: 69-86.

¿Qué relación hay entre derecho y lenguaje? Y ¿entre lenguaje y ley? ¿Cómo se inicia la serie de la juridicidad? ¿Qué la posibilita? Una característica hace de lo humano algo aparte de lo vivo: la palabra. El presente trabajo pretende recorrer parte de esta huella, intentando repensar allí la centralidad del lenguaje en la estructuración misma de la juridicidad. Volverse al lenguaje es, en definitiva –como señala P. Sneh– un gesto político.

La Botella de Klein es una figura topológica no orientable que no posee exterior ni interior. Es una superficie que implica un autoatravesamiento: la torsión que conlleva hace que los giros que la rodean se in-viertan después de dar la primera vuelta. Su construcción se gesta a partir de dos bandas de Moebius de torsión diferente pegadas en su borde. Como el sin-fin de las mil y una noches o la escena dentro de la escena, el trazado topológico de la (...) Botella de Klein reabre el enlace de una infinita interrogación: ¿Hay un afuera y un adentro en la interpretación jurídica? Si – como señala Cárcova- un razonable equilibrio permite superar la pretensión de un sentido último y definitivo en hechos y normas sin que ello importe decantar en un radical escepticismo, ¿cuál es el recorrido de esta multiplicidad? ¿Es esta errancia una migración sin orden, o por el contrario -como en los cuentos de Kafka- la apuesta por el desplazamiento del sentido nos habla de la ausencia como posibilidad? El presente trabajo pretende recorrer parte de esta huella inscribiéndose en el marco de una profunda convicción: el derecho merece la posibilidad de su resignificación. Nuevas topologías pueden ciertamente contribuir a este desafío. Desafío que nos interroga como operadores jurídicos pero fundamentalmente nos interroga como comunidad. -/- . (shrink)

The aim of this essay is to argue that, if a robust form of moral realism is true, then moral vagueness is ontic vagueness. The argument is by elimination: I show that neither semantic nor epistemic approaches to moral vagueness are satisfactory.

The distinction between a concept and its different conceptions plays a prominent role in debates about constitutional interpretation. Proponents of a dynamic reading of the Constitution-espousing interpretation of constitutional concepts according to their contemporary understandings typically rely on the idea that the Constitution entrenches only the general concepts it deploys, without authoritatively favoring any particular conception of them-specifically, without favoring the particular conception of the relevant concept that the framers of the Constitution may have had in mind. Originalists argue, to (...) the contrary, that fidelity to the Constitution requires an understanding of its provisions according to the particular conception of the abstract concepts prevalent at the time of enactment, and not those we may now favor. My main purpose in this essay is to put some pressure on the linguistic considerations that are presented in this debate, arguing that they are much more problematic than the proponents of both positions assume. I will try to show that the debate here is actually a moral-political one, mostly about the main rationale of a constitutional regime and the conditions of its legitimacy. It is, primarily, a debate about what constitutions are for, and what makes them legitimate. But I will only get to this moral issue at the end. The main part of the essay will strive to show that the semantic considerations employed in this debate are inconclusive; the way concepts are used in a given context depends on various pragmatic determinants, and those, in turn, depend on the nature of the conversation in question. The moral disagreement is, ultimately, about the kind of conversation that constitutional regimes are taken to establish. (shrink)

It is natural to think that law ought not to be vague. After all, law is supposed to guide conduct, and vague law seems poorly suited to do that. Contrary to this common impression, however, a number of authors have argued that vagueness in the law is sometimes a good thing, because it is a means to achieving certain valuable legislative ends. In this article, I argue that many authors—including Timothy Endicott and Jeremy Waldron—wrongly associate vagueness with instrumental roles that (...) are really played by a closely related semantic phenomenon. (shrink)

This study aims at investigating vagueness in Security Council Resolutions by focussing on a selection of nouns and phrases used as the main casus belli for the Second Gulf War. Analysing a corpus of Security Council Resolutions relating to the conflict, the study leads a qualitative and quantitative analysis drawing upon Mellinkoff’s theories on “weasel words”, which are “words and expressions with a very flexible meaning, strictly dependent on context and interpretation”. Special attention is devoted to the historical/political consequences of (...) such vague and indeterminate expressions. The findings indicate that excessive vagueness might have led to biased or even strategically-motivated interpretations of the Resolutions, triggering the Iraqi conflict instead of a diplomatic solution. The analysis of the “weasel words” used in the Resolutions suggests the double-faced strength of such expressions: though they can guaranteed a wide degree of applicability of the Resolutions, their subjective interpretability might become a source of manipulation and elusiveness, with the overall legislative intent of using intentional vagueness as a political strategy. (shrink)

_Interpretation and Construction_ examines the interpretation and products of intentional human behavior, focusing primarily on issues in art, law, and everyday speech. Focuses on artistic interpretation, but also includes extended discussion of interpretation of the law and everyday speech and communication. Written by one of the leading theorists of interpretation. Theoretical discussions are consistently centered around examples for ease of comprehension.

The book builds on recent work in pragmatics and speech-act theory to explain how, and to what extent, legal content is determined by linguistic considerations. At the same time, the analysis shows that some of the unique features of communication in the legal domain - in particular, its strategic nature - can be employed to put pressure on certain assumptions in philosophy of language. This enables a more nuanced picture of how semantic and pragmatic determinants of communication work in complex (...) and large-scale systems such as law. (shrink)

Vagueness in law leads to indeterminacies in legal rights and obligations in many cases. The book defends that claim and explains its implications for legal theory. Vague language is the book's focus, but vagueness is not merely a linguistic feature of law. Law is necessarily vague. That fact seems to threaten the coherence of the ideal of the rule of law. The book defends a new, coherent articulation of that ideal.

Legal philosophers distinguish between a static and a dynamic interpretation of law. The former assumes that the meaning of the words used in a legal text is set at the moment of its enactment and does not change with time. The latter allows the interpreters to update the meaning and apply a contemporary understanding to the text. The dispute between these competing theories has significant ramifications for social and political life. To take an example, depending on the approach, the term (...) “cruel punishment” used in the US Constitution will be given an 18th century meaning or a contemporary one. -/- The philosophy of language seems to provide greater support to the static approach to legal interpretation. Within this approach the lawmaker is perceived as a speaker and legal texts are interpreted as utterances. As a consequence, interpretation is a quest for the speaker/lawmaker’s intention or the public meaning that prevailed at the time of enactment. Neither the intention nor the public meaning are considered to have changed in time. -/- In this paper I argue that the philosophy of language provides the dynamic approach with an equally robust support as the static one. This support comes from an externalist perspective in semantics, rooted in philosophical pragmatism and supported by Ruth Millikan’s concept of meaning as proper function. Grounding the dynamic approach in a well-founded linguistic philosophy rises to the challenge presented by the originalists’ declaration that “it takes a theory to beat a theory”. (shrink)

The article investigates the use of the term “Law” in Richard Rorty and suggests an alternative use of the word. Although Rorty’s anti-foundationalism and antirepresentationalism are well known specially in relation to the metaphysical grounds of the human sciences, I argue that he would employ the term “law” in important rhetorical contexts. The text proposes to identify some aspects of the Rortyan Approach to “law” and, at the same time, focuses on the environment and the professional activity of the jurists (...) in this context. At the end, I suggest a different use of the term, in the sense of a literary and conversational art (an artistic ability). This use of the term shall be understood as a provisional suggestion for narrative purposes and seems to partly escape a rigorous Rortyan view. If the practice of law was for the romans not only a “science”, but also an “art” (ars), so it can be for those that act in the juridical practice today a practice of prudence qua art. (shrink)

In "The Value of Vagueness," Timothy Endicott argues that vague law can be better than precise law. I think he is in many respects correct, but will suggest that we modify and supplement his framework in order to get a firmer grip on what I call the Lawmakers' Challenge: the scenario in which lawmakers find themselves when they must determine whether the consequences of precision are worse than the consequences of vagueness. This will allow us to identify several points of (...) actual and possible disagreement regarding the value of vagueness for law, each of which could affect Endicott's claim that vagueness is sometimes preferable to precision. The framework will also allow us to compare positions that seem - on the face of it - hard to compare, due to the fact that they rest on different theories of value and/or different theories of law. (shrink)

There is at least one immediate sense in which legal discourse is perspectival: it qualifies acts and facts in the world on the basis of rules. Legal concepts are for the most part constituted by rules, both in the sense that rules define these concepts’ semantic content and that, in order to engage with legal practice, we must act according to those rules, not necessarily complying with them but at least having them in mind. This is the distinctive perspective of (...) law: however, it would be misleading to think that this is the only perspective we can have in legal discourse. That of rule-constituted legal concepts is the fundamental perspective -- the inevitable presupposition of most legal assertions -- but other perspectives are possible on top of this fundamental background: perspectives on law, stemming from the basic perspective of law. -/- In this paper, I will try to argue that some different perspectives regarding law can be accounted for by analyzing different kinds of concepts that emerge in connection with legal institutions. My argument will consist of three steps as follows. First, I will explain how legal concepts are constituted by rules, referring in this regard to John Searle’s analysis of institutional concepts as it emerges in his Making the Social World, of 2010, and amending this analysis according to some criticisms that in 1986 Neil MacCormick had raised against Searle with specific reference to the legal domain. -/- Second, I will show that there are some kinds of concepts relevant for an institution which are not captured by Searle’s analysis in terms of constitutive rules, even if this is amended according to MacCormick’s criticisms. This I will do by considering the game of chess as a simple system of rule-constituted concepts (concepts such as 'checkmate,' 'bishop,' 'king'). I will consider four examples of perfectly legitimate assertions regarding a match of chess -- these being (1) ‘I won’; (2) 'you made a good attack'; (3) 'you are cheating'; (4) 'you made good use of the first-move advantage,' and I will show that, while the first three assertions can be analyzed in terms of concepts (those of 'victory,' 'attack,' and 'cheating') which are not constituted by the rules of chess but are rather common to several different competitive games, being typical of the broader practice of competitive game-playing of which chess is an instance, the fourth assertion includes a concept (that of 'first-move advantage') which is peculiar to chess, just like a rule-constituted element, but is not constituted by the rules of chess. This analysis will lead to a new categorization of institutional concepts. Apart from rule-constituted institutional concepts, which are the only ones recognized by Searle, in order to account for cases (1), (2), and (3) I will distinguish between three kinds of meta-institutional concepts, namely, goal-oriented, mode-oriented, and value-oriented meta-institutional concepts, and then I will introduce the category of para-institutional concepts to account for case (4). -/- Finally -- and this is the third step of my argument -- I will explain how these different kinds of institutional concepts appear when we adopt different perspectives on the institutional frameworks we deal with. This will lead us to a categorization of possible perspectives regarding law that corresponds to the previous one regarding concepts. There is first a structural perspective regarding the instantiation of institutional elements which clearly involves rule-constituted institutional concepts -- as when we say 'I am making a will.' There is then a teleological perspective regarding the goal of our institutional acts which calls into question goal-oriented meta-institutional concepts -- as when we say 'I wrote that will in order for you to have a distinctive right to my property.' Then, we can adopt a strategical perspective regarding some peculiar ways in which institutional acts can be performed, and this has often to do with mode-oriented meta-institutional concepts -- as when we say 'the Labour Party is making parliamentary obstructionism so that the Government will fall before the enactment of the labour reform,' or 'workers start today a work-to-rule action.' Clearly, we can also adopt an evaluative perspective over institutional facts or acts, and here typically value oriented meta-institutional concepts emerge -- as when we say 'that rule is clearly unjust' or 'that contract is unfair.' Finally, we can limit ourselves to a descriptive perspective on phenomena which are peculiar to a given institutional setting, and here para-institutional concepts are often useful -- as when we say 'the Italian electoral system before 1990 led to a sort of reform paralysis' or 'a strict use of the criterion requiring proof beyond any reasonable doubt can be expected to entail a low conviction rate.'. (shrink)

Social conventions are those arbitrary rules and norms governing the countless behaviors all of us engage in every day without necessarily thinking about them, from shaking hands when greeting someone to driving on the right side of the road. In this book, Andrei Marmor offers a pathbreaking and comprehensive philosophical analysis of conventions and the roles they play in social life and practical reason, and in doing so challenges the dominant view of social conventions first laid out by David Lewis. (...) Marmor begins by giving a general account of the nature of conventions, explaining the differences between coordinative and constitutive conventions and between deep and surface conventions. He then applies this analysis to explain how conventions work in language, morality, and law. Marmor clearly demonstrates that many important semantic and pragmatic aspects of language assumed by many theorists to be conventional are in fact not, and that the role of conventions in the moral domain is surprisingly complex, playing mostly an auxiliary and supportive role. Importantly, he casts new light on the conventional foundations of law, arguing that the distinction between deep and surface conventions can be used to answer the prevalent objections to legal conventionalism. Social Conventions is a much-needed reappraisal of the nature of the rules that regulate virtually every aspect of human conduct. (shrink)

This review article examines Richard Ekins’ attempt to defend the concept of legislative intention from influential criticism, and to demonstrate its indispensable and central role in statutory interpretation. He rejects accounts of legislative intention in terms of the aggregation of the intentions of individual legislators, and instead, draws on recent philosophical work on the nature of group agency to propose a unitary model, in which the relevant intention is that of the legislature itself, although it is supported by the ‘interlocking’ (...) of the intentions of all its members. The legislature has two relevant intentions: a secondary or standing intention to operate by way of agreed procedures to develop and enact particular proposals for legislation to enhance the welfare of the community; and primary intentions that consist of the content of those proposals once the legislature has enacted them. Ekins restricts the evidence that is relevant and admissible in order to determine the content of such proposals; because they must be ‘open’ to all legislators, and transparent to the community, the evidence must be publicly available. This article summarizes the main theses of the book, and subjects them to critical examination. It concludes that the book adds considerable depth, rigour and theoretical insight to our understanding of these issues. But it also suggests that his argument is vulnerable to criticism at a few points, at least one of which is crucial. The argument needs a better account of what it is that constitutes the content of particular proposals when they are put to the legislature for enactment. (shrink)

The idea of legislative intent plays a central role in legal interpretation and constitutional theory, yet is repeatedly challenged as being an illusion. Refuting these challenges, this book develops a robust account of how and why legislatures form intentions, and the importance of these intentions to understanding law and parliamentary democracy.

It is widely accepted that vagueness in law calls for a specific interpretation of the law—interpretation that changes the meaning of the law and makes it more precise. According to this view, vagueness causes gaps in the law, and the role of legal interpretation in the case of vagueness is to fill such gaps. I argue that this view is mistaken and defend the thesis that vagueness in law calls only for an application of the law to the case at (...) hand, leaving the meaning of the law intact. (shrink)

Think of the color spectrum, spread out before you. You can identify the different colors with ease. But if you are asked to indicate the point at which one color ends and the next begins, you are at a loss. "There is no such point", is a natural thought: one color just shades gradually into the next.

Preface to a Symposium on Vagueness and Law at Columbia University Law School on September 24 and 25, 1999. The purpose of the seminar was to provide an opportunity for philosophers of law, philosophers of language, and philosophers of logic to discuss problems about vagueness that are currently under debate in all three areas.

Legal scholars talk and write about interpretation in terms of the meaningof words, and for many legal philosophers legal interpretation involvessubsuming particular situations under general rules. However, the more youexamine legal interpretation the more confusing the whole idea ofinterpretation becomes. The aim of this paper is to use Bernard Lonergan'sdiscussion of functional specialization to make sense of this disorderlystate of affairs.