Abstract
Legal positivism, like breakfast cereal, seems to come in a wide variety of brands, with modest variations in the ingredients. Each brand offers slightly different promises as to the benefits of choosing it over its competitors. The question for the tired morning consumer is whether anything important is at stake in the choice,’ or whether he or she should just choose whatever is handy or on sale that month. In this article, I will consider some of the debates within legal positivism, and some of the disputes between legal positivism and its critics, as a means of exploring some more general issues regarding the process of theorizing about law. In discussing the internal debates within legal positivism, I will focus on the debate between inclusive and exclusive forms of positivism, though there are numerous other, if lesser known, intra-group squabbles to be found, which are also of interest and warrant attention.
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Cited by
5 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
1. Competing Legal Positivisms, Methodology and Distinctive Visions of Law;Law and Philosophy Library;2024
2. Legal Positivism;International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences;2015
3. Comment on Simmonds—Legal Positivism and the Limits of the Contemporary Legal Theoretical Discourse;German Law Journal;2011-02-01
4. Legal Positivism;The Blackwell Guide to the Philosophy of Law and Legal Theory;2008-02-25
5. Legal Positivism;International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences;2001