The Cambridge Companion to Legal Positivism最新文献

筛选
英文 中文
The Scope of Legal Positivism: Validity or Interpretation? 法律实证主义的范围:效力还是解释?
The Cambridge Companion to Legal Positivism Pub Date : 2019-08-04 DOI: 10.2139/SSRN.3431970
Torben Spaak
{"title":"The Scope of Legal Positivism: Validity or Interpretation?","authors":"Torben Spaak","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.3431970","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.3431970","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":131205,"journal":{"name":"The Cambridge Companion to Legal Positivism","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-08-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"116163761","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2
What Is Law and What Counts as Law? The Separation Thesis in Context 什么是法律,什么才算法律?语境中的分离论
The Cambridge Companion to Legal Positivism Pub Date : 2017-08-01 DOI: 10.31228/osf.io/b5kmp
Andrei Marmor
{"title":"What Is Law and What Counts as Law? The Separation Thesis in Context","authors":"Andrei Marmor","doi":"10.31228/osf.io/b5kmp","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.31228/osf.io/b5kmp","url":null,"abstract":"The separation thesis associated with the legal positivist tradition in legal philosophy holds that the legal validity of norms depends only on their sources, not on considerations of merit or value. In this essay I show that the separation thesis comes under pressure from cases in which an answer to the question: Is o an F? partly depends on the values associated with the nature of F. This is certainly the case when we try to determine whether an object is a work of art, for example. In response, proponents of the separation thesis would want to resist the analogy with art, and maintain that the ascription of legal validity to a norm does not involve any evaluative dimensions. I argue that this line of response is not very firm, and a better way to defend the separation thesis is to see it as an answer to the question of what makes it the case that an o counts as an F in the relevant society. I try to show that this latter type of question follows from the theoretical context in which the separation thesis comes up, namely, a reductionist explanation of legal validity. My purpose here is to show how a proper construal of the separation thesis, in the context of legal positivism’s reductionist ambition, goes a long way in supporting its truth.","PeriodicalId":131205,"journal":{"name":"The Cambridge Companion to Legal Positivism","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2017-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"129291188","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
相关产品
×
本文献相关产品
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信