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
    Fuller's procedural natural law and Dworkin's interpretiv... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→Natural law theory is not significantly less concerned than contemporary legal positivism with establishing the precise boundaries and content of posited law.

    Fuller's procedural natural law and Dworkin's interpretivism both demonstrate that non-positivist frameworks can generate highly determinate legal content without the convergence on positive law sources that the claim presupposes.

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

    No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

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

    Key Terms

    Determinate legal content(as a measure of how certain or definite a legal system is)
    Clear, specific legal rules and outcomes that can be precisely determined, rather than being vague or open to wild interpretation.
    Dworkin, Ronald(as a non-positivist legal theorist)
    A highly influential American legal philosopher who believed judges interpret laws based on deeper principles of justice and fairness, not just mechanical rule-following.
    Fuller, Lon L.(as a non-positivist legal theorist)
    An American legal philosopher who argued that law isn't just a set of rules handed down by authorities, but also requires certain fair procedures and processes to be considered legitimate law.
    Interpretivism(as a legal theory)
    The legal philosophy view that laws should be understood by interpreting their deeper meaning and purpose, rather than just reading them literally as written.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Explore a random proposition
    Start fresh with something unrelated.
    Non-positivist(as a legal philosophy category)
    Frameworks that reject the idea that law is only what authorities officially declare; instead, they believe law is connected to morality, fairness, or deeper principles.
    Positive law sources(as opposed to natural law or moral principles)
    The official, written sources of law that authorities create, like statutes, regulations, and court decisions.
    Procedural natural law(as a legal philosophy approach)
    The idea that law must follow certain fair processes and procedures to be valid, rather than just coming from whatever authority is in power.
    legal positivism(Contrasted with anti-positivist views that treat law as inherently valuable)
    The view that law is a distinctive form of political order rather than a moral achievement, and that whether law is necessary or useful depends entirely on its content and context

    Connections

    2 topics

    Truth & Knowledge1 linkedJustice & Punishment1 linked

    Related

    Natural law theory is not significantly less concerned than contemporary legal p...

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    0 (0 for, 0 against)
    Edits
    1 edit

    Open for perspectives

    This idea is waiting for its first supporting or challenging perspective.

    Share the first perspective