Element contents
Series: Elements in Philosophy of Law
The Normativity of Law
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 30 November 2024
Summary
In the philosophy of law there has been a proliferation of advanced work in the last thirty years on the normativity of law. Recent theories explore law's character as a special kind of convention, shared cooperative activity, and social artifact, among other perspectives, to explain the precise way in which law provides subjects with reasons for action. Yet, for all their sophistication, such accounts fail to deliver on their promise, which is to establish how law creates more than just legal reasons for action. This Element aims to survey these views and others, situate them in a broader context of theories about the nature of law, and subsequently suggest a path forward based on the methodological continuity between analytical, evaluative, and empirical approaches to law's normativity.
Information
- Type
- Element
- Information
- Series: Elements in Philosophy of LawOnline ISBN: 9781009209854Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication: 19 December 2024
References
Aquinas, St. T. (2017). “Treatise on Law” from Summa Theologica. In Culver, K. and Giudice, M., eds., Readings in the Philosophy of Law, 3rd ed. Peterborough, ON: Broadview Press, pp. 27–40.Google Scholar
Aristotle, (2009). The Nicomachean Ethics. Translated by W. D. Ross, edited by Brown., L. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bentham, J. (1987). Anarchical Fallacies. In Waldron, J., ed., “Nonsense upon Stilts”: Bentham, Burke, and Marx on the Rights of Man. London: Methuen.Google Scholar
Bix, B. (2005). Legal Positivism. In Golding, M. P., ed., The Blackwell Guide to the Philosophy of Law and Legal Theory. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, pp. 29–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bratman, M. (1992). Shared Cooperative Activity. Philosophical Review, 101(2), 327–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Culver, K., and Giudice, M. (2017). The Unsteady State. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dyzenhaus, D. (2022). The Long Arc of Legality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Emon, A. (2010). Islamic Natural Law Theories. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Enoch, D. (2011). Reason-Giving and the Law. In Green, L. and Leiter, B., eds., Oxford Studies in Philosophy of Law: Volume 1. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 1–38.Google Scholar
Fuller, L. (1969). The Morality of Law, rev. ed. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Giudice, M. (2015). Understanding the Nature of Law. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Giudice, M. (2016). Imperialism and Importance in Dworkin’s Jurisprudence. In Waluchow, W. and Sciaraffa, S., eds., The Legacy of Ronald Dworkin. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 225–43.Google Scholar
Giudice, M. (2019). Review of Kenneth Ehrenberg, The Functions of Law (Oxford University Press, 2016). Philosophical Quarterly, 69(277), 864–67.Google Scholar
Giudice, M., and Schaeffer, M. (2012). Universal Jurisdiction and the Duty to Govern. In Tanguay-Renaud, F. and Stribopoulos, J., eds., Rethinking Criminal Law Theory. Oxford: Hart Publishing, pp. 233–48.Google Scholar
Gkouvas, T. (2023). The Place of Coercion in Law. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Green, L. (2008). Positivism and the Inseparability of Laws and Morals. New York University Law Review, 83(4), 1035–58.Google Scholar
Green, L. (2023). The Normativity of Law: What is the Problem? www.uvic.ca/victoria-colloquium/assets/docs/Green_Normativity.pdf.Google Scholar
Greenberg, M (2014). The Moral Impact Theory of Law. Yale Law Journal, 123(5), 1288–343.Google Scholar
Hart, H. L. A. (1958). Legal and Moral Obligation. In Melden, A. I., ed., Essays in Moral Philosophy. Seattle: Washington University Press, pp. 82–107.Google Scholar
Hart, H. L. A. (1983). Essays in Jurisprudence and Philosophy. Oxford: Clarendon Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hart, H. L. A. (2012). The Concept of Law, 3rd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Himma, K. (2020). Coercion and the Nature of Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kelsen, H. (1970). Pure Theory of Law, 2nd ed. Translated by M. Knight. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Mackie, J. L. (1977). The Third Theory of Law. Philosophy and Public Affairs, 7(1), 3–16.Google Scholar
Postema, G. (1987). The Normativity of Law. In Gavison, R., ed., Issues in Contemporary Legal Philosophy. Oxford: Clarendon Press, pp. 81–104.Google Scholar
Rawls, J. (1971). A Theory of Justice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Raz, J. (2009b). Between Authority and Interpretation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosen, A. (2013). The Normative Fallacy Regarding Law’s Authority. In Sciaraffa, S. and Waluchow, W., eds., Philosophical Foundations of the Nature of Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 75–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simmons, A. J. (1979). Moral Principles and Political Obligations. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Smith, M. B. E. (1973). Is There a Prima Facie Obligation to Obey the Law? Yale Law Journal, 82(5), 950–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tamanaha, B. (2001). A General Jurisprudence of Law and Society. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Twining, W. (2009). General Jurisprudence. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, K. P. (2018). Kayanerenkó:wa. Winnipeg, MB: University of Manitoba Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Woodbury-Smith, K. (2020). The Nature of Law and Potential Coercion. Ratio Juris, 33(2), 223–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yankah, E. (2008). The Force of Law: The Role of Coercion in Legal Norms. University of Richmond Law Review, 42(5), 1195–256.Google Scholar
Accessibility standard: Unknown
Why this information is here
This section outlines the accessibility features of this content - including support for screen readers, full keyboard navigation and high-contrast display options. This may not be relevant for you.Accessibility Information
Accessibility compliance for the HTML of this element is currently unknown
and may be updated in the future.
- 12
- Cited by