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
    Dworkin's 'law as integrity' shows that determining what ... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→A law becomes an offence solely because of the fact that Parliament enacted it, not because of any evaluative judgment about whether enactment was a good idea.

    Dworkin's 'law as integrity' shows that determining what the law *is* already embeds evaluative reasoning about what it ought to mean.

    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    1 reason against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Legal interpretation requires choosing among multiple consistent readings; choice itself presupposes value judgment about which interpretation best fits the legal community's principles.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Dworkin's 'fit' requirement (coherence with past law) cannot be applied without evaluative judgment about which principles most justly explain existing legal materials.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If law had determinate meaning independent of evaluation, hard cases wouldn't exist; their prevalence shows interpretation necessarily involves normative reasoning about legal legitimacy.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.The distinction between 'discovering' law's meaning and 'creating' it through evaluation suggests some propositions are simply true or false regardless of judges' evaluative commitments.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Even if interpretation involves judgment, this doesn't prove evaluative reasoning is constitutive of 'what law is' rather than merely necessary for resolving ambiguity about pre-existing law.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Dworkin conflates the epistemic challenge of knowing law with the metaphysical question of what law fundamentally is; these require separate answers.
      ?

      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.

    Connections

    2 topics

    Philosophy of Language1 linkedJustice & Punishment1 linked

    Related

    A law becomes an offence solely because of the fact that Parliament enacted it, ...Dworkin conflates the epistemic challenge of knowing law with the metaphysical q...Dworkin's 'fit' requirement (coherence with past law) cannot be applied without ...Even if interpretation involves judgment, this doesn't prove evaluative reasonin...
    +3 moreShow less
    If law had determinate meaning independent of evaluation, hard cases wouldn't ex...Legal interpretation requires choosing among multiple consistent readings; choic...The distinction between 'discovering' law's meaning and 'creating' it through ev...

    Details

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