新法律反实证主义

IF 1.2 Q1 LAW
Hasan Dindjer
{"title":"新法律反实证主义","authors":"Hasan Dindjer","doi":"10.1017/S1352325220000208","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract According to a recent wave of work by legal anti-positivists, legal norms are a subset of moral norms. This striking “one-system” view of law has rapidly become the dominant form of anti-positivism, but its implications have so far been little tested. This article argues that the one-system view leads systematically to untenable conclusions about what legal rights and obligations we have. For many clear legal norms, the view lacks the resources to explain the existence of corresponding moral norms. And its criteria for distinguishing legal norms within morality imply an under- or over-inclusive set of legal norms. I stress the special difficulties that apply beyond obligations, in the case of privileges and powers, and I show that the view's problems do not only—or mainly—concern egregiously unjust law, or indeed morally defective law at all. I close with reflections on legal normativity and the prospects for different forms of anti-positivism.","PeriodicalId":44287,"journal":{"name":"Legal Theory","volume":"26 1","pages":"181 - 213"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2020-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/S1352325220000208","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"THE NEW LEGAL ANTI-POSITIVISM\",\"authors\":\"Hasan Dindjer\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/S1352325220000208\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract According to a recent wave of work by legal anti-positivists, legal norms are a subset of moral norms. This striking “one-system” view of law has rapidly become the dominant form of anti-positivism, but its implications have so far been little tested. This article argues that the one-system view leads systematically to untenable conclusions about what legal rights and obligations we have. For many clear legal norms, the view lacks the resources to explain the existence of corresponding moral norms. And its criteria for distinguishing legal norms within morality imply an under- or over-inclusive set of legal norms. I stress the special difficulties that apply beyond obligations, in the case of privileges and powers, and I show that the view's problems do not only—or mainly—concern egregiously unjust law, or indeed morally defective law at all. I close with reflections on legal normativity and the prospects for different forms of anti-positivism.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44287,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Legal Theory\",\"volume\":\"26 1\",\"pages\":\"181 - 213\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/S1352325220000208\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Legal Theory\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/S1352325220000208\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Legal Theory","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S1352325220000208","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

摘要根据法律反实证主义者最近的一系列工作,法律规范是道德规范的一个子集。这种引人注目的“一个体系”的法律观已经迅速成为反实证主义的主导形式,但其影响迄今为止几乎没有得到检验。本文认为,一个系统的观点系统地导致了关于我们拥有什么样的法律权利和义务的站不住脚的结论。对于许多明确的法律规范,该观点缺乏解释相应道德规范存在的资源。它在道德中区分法律规范的标准意味着一套不太包容或过于包容的法律规范。我强调了在特权和权力的情况下,适用于义务之外的特殊困难,我表明,这种观点的问题不仅——或者主要——涉及严重不公正的法律,或者根本不涉及道德缺陷的法律。最后,我对法律规范性和不同形式的反实证主义的前景进行了思考。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
THE NEW LEGAL ANTI-POSITIVISM
Abstract According to a recent wave of work by legal anti-positivists, legal norms are a subset of moral norms. This striking “one-system” view of law has rapidly become the dominant form of anti-positivism, but its implications have so far been little tested. This article argues that the one-system view leads systematically to untenable conclusions about what legal rights and obligations we have. For many clear legal norms, the view lacks the resources to explain the existence of corresponding moral norms. And its criteria for distinguishing legal norms within morality imply an under- or over-inclusive set of legal norms. I stress the special difficulties that apply beyond obligations, in the case of privileges and powers, and I show that the view's problems do not only—or mainly—concern egregiously unjust law, or indeed morally defective law at all. I close with reflections on legal normativity and the prospects for different forms of anti-positivism.
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
CiteScore
1.40
自引率
16.70%
发文量
15
×
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