¿Fue Richard Rorty un positivista jurídico? (A Propósito de la Oxford Amnesty Rorty's Lecture de 1993)

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to compare an approach to normativity that may be found in several of the works of a philosopher such as Rorty with the positivist methodological model that may be found in a jurist such as Hart. I aim to show that both depart from simple explanations based on jus naturalists models or on the Austinian model (which explains normativity on the basis of exclusive notions such as 'sovereign', 'imperative' or 'obedience habit'). Both perspectives get close to an analysis that places the origin of norms in a more plausible and complex perspective, where the basic assumption is either the notion of 'acknowledgement rules', which allows the identification of rules as a system of norms that are not necessarily legislated (Hart), or the analysis of non polemic propositions which determine and inform about those things that count as norms and those that do no within a certain ethnocentric social practice (Rorty).