理想的“应该”和优化

R. Alexy
{"title":"理想的“应该”和优化","authors":"R. Alexy","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780198796831.003.0014","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The basis of principles theory is the norm-theoretic distinction between rules and principles. In A Theory of Constitutional Law (2002), I have defined rules as definitive commands and principles as optimization requirements. Against the definition of principles as optimization requirements the objection has been raised that optimization requirements are rules too because the optimization is definitively commanded. This chapter offers a reconstruction of the distinction between rules and principles that connects the concept of the ideal ‘ought’ with the concept of optimization requirement. In the language of mathematical logic, this is expressed by means of a ‘fundamental equivalence’. This equivalence is the basis of the author’s reply to all of the objections against his distinction between rules and principles.","PeriodicalId":142448,"journal":{"name":"Law's Ideal Dimension","volume":"32 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Ideal ‘Ought’ and Optimization\",\"authors\":\"R. Alexy\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/oso/9780198796831.003.0014\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The basis of principles theory is the norm-theoretic distinction between rules and principles. In A Theory of Constitutional Law (2002), I have defined rules as definitive commands and principles as optimization requirements. Against the definition of principles as optimization requirements the objection has been raised that optimization requirements are rules too because the optimization is definitively commanded. This chapter offers a reconstruction of the distinction between rules and principles that connects the concept of the ideal ‘ought’ with the concept of optimization requirement. In the language of mathematical logic, this is expressed by means of a ‘fundamental equivalence’. This equivalence is the basis of the author’s reply to all of the objections against his distinction between rules and principles.\",\"PeriodicalId\":142448,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Law's Ideal Dimension\",\"volume\":\"32 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-07-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Law's Ideal Dimension\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198796831.003.0014\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Law's Ideal Dimension","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198796831.003.0014","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

原则理论的基础是规范理论对规则和原则的区分。在《宪法学理论》(2002)中,我将规则定义为明确的命令,将原则定义为优化要求。与将原则定义为优化需求相反,有人提出异议,认为优化需求也是规则,因为优化是明确命令的。本章提供了规则和原则之间的区别的重建,将理想“应该”的概念与优化要求的概念联系起来。在数理逻辑的语言中,这是通过“基本等价”来表达的。这种等同是作者对反对他区分规则和原则的所有异议的答复的基础。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Ideal ‘Ought’ and Optimization
The basis of principles theory is the norm-theoretic distinction between rules and principles. In A Theory of Constitutional Law (2002), I have defined rules as definitive commands and principles as optimization requirements. Against the definition of principles as optimization requirements the objection has been raised that optimization requirements are rules too because the optimization is definitively commanded. This chapter offers a reconstruction of the distinction between rules and principles that connects the concept of the ideal ‘ought’ with the concept of optimization requirement. In the language of mathematical logic, this is expressed by means of a ‘fundamental equivalence’. This equivalence is the basis of the author’s reply to all of the objections against his distinction between rules and principles.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
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×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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