Class Notes (905,605)
CA (538,462)
UTSG (45,721)
PHL (1,576)
PHL370H1 (4)
Lecture

Hart's Responses to Dworkin

5 Pages
128 Views

Department
Philosophy
Course Code
PHL370H1
Professor
Professor Waterfall

This preview shows pages 1-2. Sign up to view the full 5 pages of the document.
PHL370 November 4, 2010
+DUW¶V5HVSRQVHV to Dworkin:
1.moral principles part of rule of recognition
2. legal
3. principles and certainty
4.conventions ± GZRUNLQLQWURGXFHVQRWLRQRIFRQYHQWLRQ«RRSVORO
5.positivism as a semantic theory
1. Moral principles as part of r of r
-a judge can always bring moral principles from outside the law
-dworkin argued against this because it was too wide open
-too many morals to choose from. Not legal principles they are choosing from
-Hart responds that he denies bringing outside sources is the only option\
-you could have moral principles in a r of r
-you could also have legal principles in a r of r
-Hart rejects that positivism is bound only to pedigree or sources alone
-he recognizes other approaches where moral principles ARE part of the law ±
Australiam and American constituation
-3*³LQVRPHV\VWHPVRIODZ«WKHVHPD\IRUPWKHFRQWHQWRI«UHVWUDLQW´
-examples from inside the law not outside are brought to bare
-what distinguishes positivists from naturalists is that an r of r CAN contain moral
principles but does not NEED to. ± it would still be valid law
-soft/inclusive positivism is that which means moral principles CAN have moral
principles
-hard positivism means it CANNOT be a moral principle at all
2. Legal
-principles can also be in a r of r
-legal principles must be part of a pedigree
-pg 260?
-LIWKH\GRQ¶WKDYHDSHGLJUHHWKHQDURIUFDQVWLOOPDNHUHIHUHQFHWRWKHPLQDJHQHUDO
way
-Dworkin accepts that some principles will have a pedigree
-Hart GRHVQ¶WGLVDJUHH
-hart questions whether rules/laws like princples are radically different in how they
pertain to decisions.
-there is a difference to statutes and principles
-sometimes laws conflict with one another ± ZHGRQ¶WJHWULGRIRQHZHMXVWPDke one
weigh more heavily
-laws are usually all or nothing but not always
- we can identify system in which legal systems play no part
-WKHUHDUHVRPHZKHUHWKDWNLQGRIMXGLFLDOUHDVRQLQJLVQ¶WYDOLG
www.notesolution.com
-if that is correct than dwrokings claim that legal principles apply to all law anywhere is
incorrect
-the application and discoveries of principles happens in certain instances.
-EG of a legal principle ± \RXFDWSURILWE\\RXURZQFULPH
3. principles and certainty
-PG 251
-legal positivism demands that the law be determinable by certainty
-what is harts position on certainty?
-dworkin exaggerated the degree of certainty that a positivist requires
-what if there is a system of only primary rules
-ZRXOGFDXVHUDGLFDOXQFHUWDLQWZKDWEHORQJVZKHUHHWF
-would have to be a simple community
-jjust because there is SOME uncertainty does not invalidate the legal system\
-pg 251-2
-hart says moral principles can still be brought to bare on the debate.
-hart frames the sort of principles that would go into a rule of recognition PG 254 to
make law in accordance with morality
4. Conventions
-dworkins statement that the justification for a secondary rule is acceptance ± not so true.
-DFFHSWDQFHGRHVQ¶WMXVWLI\LW
- pg 254 ± hart accepts a criticsm of dworkin
-if you have 2 communities: 1. Individuals believe P (these people all agree about P). this
is not conventionalism. 2. It is a reason to believe P, that most people believe it: this is a
convention!
-ordinary law is not conventional in this sense: it can be new or not accepted but still a
law
-in the case of moral principles (not conventional moral principles) apply whether people
accept them or not.
-but moral principles in the law can be treated under this same conventional principle.
They must be practices in the judicial community to resolve disputes.
-following a moral because it is a convention does not make it a moral
-Dworking says positivists have to adopt convention to use moral principles = bad
-Hart says this is not the case,
5. Positivism as a semantic theory
-semantic ± pertaining to meaning
-technical sense arises in 1930s a theory that has to do with the truth of a
proposition
-for a concept to be true or false
-Dworkin seems to flip and flop between the two meanings
-Says that psoitvwt seem to be arguing about the meaning of the word `law`
-Hart`s (pg 246) response: if the meaning of the law is determined by pedigree factors
how is it that udges are arguing about meaning.
-pedigree determines meaning
www.notesolution.com

Loved by over 2.2 million students

Over 90% improved by at least one letter grade.

Leah — University of Toronto

OneClass has been such a huge help in my studies at UofT especially since I am a transfer student. OneClass is the study buddy I never had before and definitely gives me the extra push to get from a B to an A!

Leah — University of Toronto
Saarim — University of Michigan

Balancing social life With academics can be difficult, that is why I'm so glad that OneClass is out there where I can find the top notes for all of my classes. Now I can be the all-star student I want to be.

Saarim — University of Michigan
Jenna — University of Wisconsin

As a college student living on a college budget, I love how easy it is to earn gift cards just by submitting my notes.

Jenna — University of Wisconsin
Anne — University of California

OneClass has allowed me to catch up with my most difficult course! #lifesaver

Anne — University of California
Description
PHL370 November 4, 2010 +,798#08543808 to Dworkin: 1.moral principles part of rule of recognition 2. legal 3. principles and certainty 4.conventions Z47NL3L3974:.08349L4341.43;039L434458O4O 5.positivism as a semantic theory 1. Moral principles as part of r of r -a judge can always bring moral principles from outside the law -dworkin argued against this because it was too wide open -too many morals to choose from. Not legal principles they are choosing from -Hart responds that he denies bringing outside sources is the only option -you could have moral principles in a r of r -you could also have legal principles in a r of r -Hart rejects that positivism is bound only to pedigree or sources alone -he recognizes other approaches where moral principles ARE part of the law Australiam and American constituation -!*L3842088902841O,Z 9K0802,14729K0.43903941 70897,L39 -examples from inside the law not outside are brought to bare -what distinguishes positivists from naturalists is that an r of r CAN contain moral principles but does not NEED to. it would still be valid law -softinclusive positivism is that which means moral principles CAN have moral principles -hard positivism means it CANNOT be a moral principle at all 2. Legal -principles can also be in a r of r -legal principles must be part of a pedigree -pg 260? -L19K0439K,;0,50LJ7009K03,7417.,389LOO2,N07010703.0949K02L3,J0307,O way -Dworkin accepts that some principles will have a pedigree -Hart 40839L8,J700 -hart questions whether ruleslaws like princples are radically different in how they pertain to decisions. -there is a difference to statutes and principles -sometimes laws conflict with one another Z0439J097L41430Z0M:892,ke one weigh more heavily -laws are usually all or nothing but not always - we can identify system in which legal systems play no part -9K070,708420ZK0709K,9NL341M:L.L,O70,843L3JL839;,OL www.notesolution.com
More Less
Unlock Document


Only pages 1-2 are available for preview. Some parts have been intentionally blurred.

Unlock Document
You're Reading a Preview

Unlock to view full version

Unlock Document

Log In


OR

Don't have an account?

Join OneClass

Access over 10 million pages of study
documents for 1.3 million courses.

Sign up

Join to view


OR

By registering, I agree to the Terms and Privacy Policies
Already have an account?
Just a few more details

So we can recommend you notes for your school.

Reset Password

Please enter below the email address you registered with and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Add your courses

Get notes from the top students in your class.


Submit