This paper discusses two currently usual interpretations of Hart’s work; its purpose is to assess how useful they are to coherently understand both Hart and a positivist theory of Law. The first interpretation claims that Hart’s purported goal in his The concept of Law (in spite of his analytical anti-metaphysical approach) is to unravel the true essence or nature of Law, i.e. the essential features of its very concept. Still, is this interpretation coherent with mpirism’s positivistic commitment? The second question revolves around Law and Morality: in spite of Hart’s express defence of a positivistic concept of Law, these days it is claim that he does not reject the thesis of the necessary connection between Law and Morality. Now, is it possible to make this claim compatible with the positivist concept and methodology allegedly assumed by Hart?
The Concept of Law. Cincuenta años
REDONDO NATELLA, MARIA CRISTINA
2014-01-01
Abstract
This paper discusses two currently usual interpretations of Hart’s work; its purpose is to assess how useful they are to coherently understand both Hart and a positivist theory of Law. The first interpretation claims that Hart’s purported goal in his The concept of Law (in spite of his analytical anti-metaphysical approach) is to unravel the true essence or nature of Law, i.e. the essential features of its very concept. Still, is this interpretation coherent with mpirism’s positivistic commitment? The second question revolves around Law and Morality: in spite of Hart’s express defence of a positivistic concept of Law, these days it is claim that he does not reject the thesis of the necessary connection between Law and Morality. Now, is it possible to make this claim compatible with the positivist concept and methodology allegedly assumed by Hart?
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
