Premium
On Two Juxtapositions: Concept and Nature, Law and Philosophy. Some Comments on Joseph Raz's “Can There Be a Theory of Law?”
Author(s) -
ALEXY ROBERT
Publication year - 2007
Publication title -
ratio juris
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.344
H-Index - 10
eISSN - 1467-9337
pISSN - 0952-1917
DOI - 10.1111/j.1467-9337.2007.00353.x
Subject(s) - law , character (mathematics) , economic justice , philosophy of law , philosophy , epistemology , law and economics , sociology , political science , comparative law , mathematics , geometry
. In his article “Can There Be a Theory of Law?” Joseph Raz maintains, first, that the concept of law is parochial, whereas its nature is universal, and, second, that legal philosophy cannot be part of the law. This author argues that neither the first nor the second claim is true. The first claim fails to do justice to the dual character of concepts that makes it possible for them to be in part parochial and in part universal. The second claim must fail, for courts are not only participants in a parochial enterprise where they have special authority to establish what the law actually is, they are also participants in an universalistic enterprise, where they have no special authority to decide what is legally correct. Law qua universalistic enterprise necessarily comprises philosophical issues.