Normative Legal Positivism
from Metaphysics to Politic
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5347/isonomia.v0i54.463Keywords:
common sense, legal method, legal positivism, metaphysics, normativityAbstract
Taking as its starting point María Cristina Redondo’s book Positivismo jurídico “interno”, this article proposes an alternative conception of normativist legal positivism. The article argues that legal theory can be neutral to the extent that it is intersubjective and transparent regarding its own metaphysical premises. On the one hand, thus, the article aims to shed light on the role of metaphysics and common sense in the construction of the concept of law. On the other hand, it seeks to make more transparent the ethical-political choices that constitute legal discourses, including theoretical ones. To pursue these goals the article first analyzes Redondo’s theses on the ontology / epistemology distinction and the possibility of objective knowledge, and advances the idea that inter-subjectivity, and not objectivity, should be the appropriate criterion for normativist legal positivism. Second, the article examines the role of normativity in normativist legal positivism, focusing on the metaphysical nature of the thesis that law belongs to the fields of normativity and practical reason. The following sections then discuss reductionist and anti-reductionist conceptions of legal “entities” (norms, normative statements, propositions, and beliefs) and the theory of legal sources. The final section addresses the question of the axiological neutrality of legal theory and discusses the possibility of describing participants’ internal point of view without committing to existing legal practice(s).
References
Austin, Langshaw John (1956-1957). A Plea for Excuses. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, New Series, Vol. 57, 1-30.
Black, Max (1958). Notes on the meaning of “rule”. Theoria XXIV(2): 107-126; (3): 139-161.
Bobbio, Norberto (1967). Essere e dover essere nella scienza giuridica. Rivista di filosofia, Vol. 58, No. 3, 235-262.
Celano, Bruno (2013). Normative Legal Positivism, Neutrality, and the Rule of Law. In J. Ferrer Beltrán, J. Moreso & D. Papayannis (eds.), Neutrality and Theory of Law. Dordrecht: Springer, 175-201. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-0076067-7_9.
Coleman, Jules L. (1982). Negative and Positive Positivism. Journal of Legal Studies, Vol. 11, No. 1, 139-164.
De Caro, Mario (2015). Realism, Common Sense, and Science. The Monist, Vol. 98, No. 1, 1-18.
Duranti Alessandro (2003). Language as Culture in U.S. Anthropology. Three Paradigms. Current Anthropology, Vol. 44, No. 3, 323-347.
Evans Jonathan St. B.T. and Stanovich Keith E. (2013). Dual-Process Theories of Higher Cognition: Advancing the Debate. Perspectives on Psychological Science, Vol. 8, No. 3, 223-241.
Fitch, W. Tecumseh (2017). Empirical approaches to the study of language evolution. Psychon Bull Rev, Vol. 24, 3-33. https://DOI10.3758/s13423-017-1236-5.
Fitch, Frederic Brenton (1964). Universal Metalanguages for Philosophy. The Review of Metaphysics, Vol. 17, No. 3, 396-402.
Gibbard, Allan (1994). Meaning and Normativity. Philosophical Issues, Vol. 5, Truth and Rationality, 95-115.
Hempel, Carl Gustav (1952). Fundamentals of Concept Formation in Empirical Science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
____________ (1965). Aspects of Scientific Explanation and Other Essays in the Philosophy of Science. New York: The Free Press.
Himma, Kenneth Einar (2004) 2012). Inclusive Legal Positivism. In J.L. Coleman, K.E. Himma & S.J. Shapiro (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Jurisprudence and Philosophy of Law. Oxford: Oxford UP, 2012 (published on line), 125-165. https://doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199270972.013.0004.
Jori, Mario (1985). Saggi di metagiurisprudenza. Milano: Giuffrè.
___________ (2003). L’ultimo Hart e la teoria dionisiaca del diritto: una discussione mancata. Ragion pratica, No. 2, 405-434. https://doi:10.1415/10867.
___________ (2010). Del diritto inesistente: saggio di metagiurisprudenza descrittiva. Pisa: Edizioni ETS.
_________ (2018). Concezioni del diritto vecchie e nuove. Il positivismo giuridico rivisitato sullo sfondo del neocostituzionalismo. Criminalia. Annuario di Scienze Penalistiche. Discrimen, 1-54. https://discrimen.it/wp-content/uploads/Jori-Concezioni-del-diritto-vecchie-e-nuove.pdf
Kahneman, Daniel (2011). Thinking, Fast and Slow. New York: Farrar, Straus & Giroux.
Kant, Immanuel (1781/1787). The Critique of Pure Reason, N. Kemp Smith (trans.). New York: Humanities Press, 1950.
Marradi, Alberto (1990). Classification, typology, taxonomy. Quality and Quantity, Vol. 24, 129-157.
Perry, Stephen (1996). The Varieties of Legal Positivism: Critical Notice: Inclusive Legal Positivism by W.J. Waluchow. Canadian Journal of Law & Jurisprudence, Vol. 9, No. 2, 361-381. doi:10.1017/S0841820900003490.
Priel, Daniel (2005). Farewell to the Exclusive–Inclusive Debate. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, Vol. 25, No. 4, 675-696. https://doi.org/10.1093/ojls/gqi033.
Priest, Graham (1984). Semantic Closure. Studia Logica: An International Journal for Symbolic Logic, Vol. 43, No. 1/2, Paraconsistent Logics, 117-129.
Redondo Natella, Maria Cristina (1994-1995). Normas jurídicas, aceptación y justificación. La noción de razón para la acción como instrumento de análisis conceptual, Universidad Pompeu Fabra, 1-397.
___________ (1996). Razones internas vs. razones externas. Isonomía, Vol. 14, 135145.
___________ (1998a). El carácter práctico de los deberes jurídicos. Doxa, a. 21, vol. II, 355-370.
___________ (1998b). Reglas ‘genuinas’ y positivismo jurídico. In P. Comanducci and R. Guastini (a cura di), Analisi e diritto 1997. Ricerche di giurisprudenza analitica. Torino: Giappichelli, 243-276.
___________ (1999). Reasons for Action and the Law, Dordrecht/Boston/London: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
___________ (2001). Normativity in Legal Contexts. An Institutional Analysis. In E. Lagerspetz, H. Iakäheimo and J. Kotkavirta (eds.), On the Nature of Social and Institutional Reality. Jyväskylä: Jyväskylä University Printing House, 165-192.
___________ (2002). Algunas consideraciones ontológicas y epistémicas acerca del contenido del derecho. In S. Pozzolo (ed.), La legge e i diritti. Torino: Giappichelli, 29-80.
___________ (2003). Il problema della normatività giuridica. In R. Egidi, M. dell’Utri and M. De Caro (a cura di), Normatività, fatti, valori. Macerata: Quodlibet, 344-353.
___________ (2005). Sul positivismo giuridico e l’applicazione del diritto. Materiali per una storia della cultura giuridica, a. XXXV, No. 1, 245-252.
___________ (2007). Positivismo excluyente, positivismo incluyente y positivismo indiferente. In J.J. Moreso & M.C. Redondo (eds.), Un dialogo con la teoría del derecho de Eugenio Bulygin. Madrid: Marcial Pons, 117-129
___________ (2014). Some Remarks on the Connection between Law and Morality. Law and Philosophy, Vol. 33, 773-793. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10982014-9205-x.
___________ (2018). Positivismo jurídico “interno”. Kranj: Klub Revus.
___________ (2019). Legal Normativity as a Moral Property. Revus, Vol. 37, 57-68
Roversi, Corrado (2019). Law as an Artifact: Three Questions. Analisi e Diritto, No. 2, 41-67
Ruiz Manero, Juan (2014). El legado del positivismo jurídico. Ocho ensayos sobre cinco autores positivistas. Lima/Bogotá: Palestra-Temis.
Scarpelli, Uberto (1965). Cos’è il positivismo giuridico, a cura di A. Catania e M. Jori, Napoli: ESI, 1997. Spanish translation A.N. Vaquero & S. Zorzetto (eds.), ¿Que es el positivismo juridico?, Editorial Zela, Puno, 2021.
___________ (1971). Il metodo giuridico. Rivista diritto processuale civile, 553-574.
___________ (1972). Dovere morale, obbligo giuridico, impegno politico. Rivista di filosofia, 291-299.
___________ (1983). La teoria generale del diritto: prospettive per un trattato. In U. Scarpelli (ed.), La teoria generale del diritto. Problemi e tendenze attuali. Studi dedicati a Noberto Bobbio. Milano: Comunità, 281-340.
___________ (1986). Etica e diritto, a cura di L. Gianformaggio and E. Lecaldano. Roma: Laterza.
Schauer, Frederick (2021). Normative Legal Positivism. In P. Mindus and T. Spaak (eds.), Cambridge Companion to Legal Positivism. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 61-78.
Schiavello, Aldo (2007). Scienza giuridica, metodo, giudizi di valore. TCRS. Pragmatismo concettuale e proceduralismo giuridico, Vol. 1, 1-19.
Strawson, Peter Frederick (1959). Individuals: An Essay in Descriptive Metaphysics. London/New York: Routledge.
___________ (1961). Social Morality and Individual Ideal. Philosophy, Vol. 36, No. 136, 1-17.
van Hoecke, Mark A.A. and Ost, Francois (2010). Epistemological perspectives in jurisprudence. In M. Del Mar, W. Twining, & M. Giudice (eds.), Legal Theory and the Legal Academy. Farnham, UK: Ashgate, 187-204.
Varzi, Achille C. (2011). On Doing Ontology without Metaphysics. Philosophical Perspectives, Vol. 25, No. 1, 407-423.
Vega, Jesús (2018). Legal philosophy as practical philosophy. Revus, Vol. 34. https://doi.org/10.4000/revus.3859
Waluchow, Wilfrid J. (1998). The Many Faces of Legal Positivism. The University of Toronto Law Journal, Vol. 48, No. 3, 387-449.
___________ (2001). Legal positivism, inclusive versus exclusive. Encyclopaedia of Philosophy, Taylor and Francis. doi:10.4324/9780415249126-T064-1.
Winch, Peter (1956). Social Science. The British Journal of Sociology, Vol. 7, No. 1, 1833.
___________ (1972a [1958]). Il concetto di scienza sociale e le sue reazioni con la filosofia (trad. it. Di M. Mondadori, M. Terni). Il saggiatore, Milano [The Idea of a Social Science and its Relation to Philosophy. London; Routledge & Kegan Paul,].
___________ (1965). The Universalizability of Morals Judgements. In Id., Ethics and Action. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1972, 151-170.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
ITAM, the publisher, has the copyright of published articles and remaining types of publications. Publications are in open access and licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. That means, among other things, that authors can freely share their articles, once published in Isonomía, on their personal web pages, Academia.edu, etc.. Between formal acceptance and online publication, authors can share the final drafts of their articles. In contrast, authors must seek permission to reproduce or reprint work, and mention, in the first footnote, "previously published in Isonomía, year, n. x, pp. xx-xx"..
