Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    A positivist conception of law — specifically a version o... — Carmelics
    Home/Rights & Liberty
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    A positivist conception of law — specifically a version of the Separation Thesis — is normatively justified on the grounds of autonomy and freedom of conscience.

    Rights & LibertySocial Contract
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    2 reasons against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.There are compelling normative arguments in favor of adopting a positivist conception of law.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Autonomy and freedom of conscience support separating legal requirements from moral requirements in at least some spheres of conduct.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The Separation Thesis holds that the question of what the law is ought to be distinct from the question of what morality requires.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Lon Fuller argued that law possesses an internal morality—procedural fairness, generality, publicity—without which it cannot function as law.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If legal validity already presupposes moral criteria (Fuller's eight desiderata), the Separation Thesis cannot be defended as a clean conceptual divide.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Autonomy is therefore better protected by requiring law to meet moral standards than by insulating legal validity from moral assessment.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Ronald Dworkin demonstrated that hard cases are resolved through principles that carry moral weight and are treated as legally binding by courts.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If moral principles function as genuine legal standards in adjudication, positivism's rule of recognition cannot exhaustively account for what the law is.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Separating legal from moral requirements thus obscures rather than protects conscience, since citizens remain subject to morally-laden judicial reasoning without acknowledged moral accountability.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Topics

    Rights & LibertySocial Contract

    Connections

    1 topic

    Philosophy of Language1 linked

    Related

    Autonomy and freedom of conscience support separating legal requirements from mo...Autonomy is therefore better protected by requiring law to meet moral standards ...If legal validity already presupposes moral criteria (Fuller's eight desiderata)...If moral principles function as genuine legal standards in adjudication, positiv...
    +5 moreShow less
    Lon Fuller argued that law possesses an internal morality—procedural fairness, g...Ronald Dworkin demonstrated that hard cases are resolved through principles that...Separating legal from moral requirements thus obscures rather than protects cons...The Separation Thesis holds that the question of what the law is ought to be dis...There are compelling normative arguments in favor of adopting a positivist conce...

    Similar

    There are compelling normative arguments in favor of adopting a positi...86%Contemporary legal positivists' concern to distinguish posited law fro...78%Purely positive law takes its place in a scheme of practical reasoning...78%An anarchist — who rejects the normative validity of law — can nonethe...77%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: lawphil-nature
    View source passageHide passage
    As explained in the next sub-section, Dworkin’s methodological view incorporates some prescriptive elements. But one prominent advocate of an exclusively prescriptive project is Neil MacCormick (MacCormick 1985; see also Campbell 1996; Murphy 2001; Postema 1989; Schauer 1996; Waldron 2001). MacCormick argues that there are compelling normative arguments in favor of adopting a positivist conception of law. In particular, he suggests that values like autonomy and freedom of conscience demand that
    Extraction notes

    Validity: Extracted via Max plan + API grounding/validity checks

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (1 for, 2 against)
    Edits
    1 edit