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
    Home/Original/inverse
    See Original
    Inverse View

    It is not the case that Natural law theory of law is approximated by Dworkin's account of law and adjudication, both in frontier cases like Nuremberg and in ordinary legal reasoning.

    ?Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Dworkin's interpretivism derives legal obligations from the practice of a particular community's institutional history, not universal moral truths.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Natural law grounds legal validity in reason-independent moral norms binding all legal systems, regardless of local institutional fit.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.This distinction means Dworkin's 'law as integrity' is a sophisticated positivism about particular legal systems, not natural law theory.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Hart's positivist critique in 'Postscript' shows Dworkin's moral principles enter law through judicial recognition, resembling a social rule of recognition.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Natural law requires that unjust positive law lacks legal validity as such; Dworkin never endorses this strong invalidity thesis for wicked law.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Dworkin treats moral standards as capable of being morally objective and true, in line with natural law theory.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Dworkin's account holds that moral standards function as a direct source of law or justification for judicial decision.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Natural law theory similarly treats moral standards as grounding legal correctness.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

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