The Journal of Ethics 5 (3):199-219 (2001)

Timothy Endicott
Oxford University
Widespread, deep controversy as to the content of the law of a community is compatible with the view that the law is a system of rules. I defend that view through a critique of Ronald Dworkin's discussion of Riggs v. Palmer 22 N.E. 188. Dworkin raised an important challenge for jurisprudence: to account for the fact that legal rights and duties are frequently controversial. I offer an explanation of the possibility of deep disagreement about the application of social rules, which reconciles controversy as to the content of the law, with the model of a legal system as a system of rules. And I discuss the implications for understanding the role of judicial discretion in law
Keywords controversy  disagreement  indeterminacy  legal validity  principles  rules  social rules
Categories (categorize this paper)
Reprint years 2004
DOI 10.1023/A:1012703223987
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 59,775
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

Similar books and articles


Added to PP index

Total views
67 ( #154,027 of 2,432,668 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
5 ( #138,335 of 2,432,668 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes