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 Sound and legitimate adjudication under natural law theory requires prioritizing social-fact sourced law and setting it aside only when it is too iniquitous to apply.

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Lon Fuller argued that law possesses an internal morality of procedural principles whose violation renders putative law not merely iniquitous but legally null from the outset.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If procedurally defective enactments fail to constitute law at all, then the claim's framework of 'setting aside' posited law mischaracterizes the adjudicative task as one of exception rather than legal identification.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Sound adjudication therefore requires first determining what counts as law via moral criteria, not prioritizing social-fact sources and carving out narrow exceptions for extreme iniquity.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Ronald Dworkin's interpretivism holds that legal principles with moral weight are already part of law, not external correctives applied when posited rules fail.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The claim's binary between social-fact sourced law and exceptional departure reproduces the positivist framework that natural law theory, on Dworkin's reading, should fundamentally reject.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Adjudication that treats moral reasoning as a residual override rather than constitutive of legal interpretation misrepresents how law's normative force actually operates in hard cases.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Natural law theories hold that conscientious attention to social-fact sources and pedigreed rules takes priority in adjudication.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Natural law theories permit departure from posited law only to the extent that such law is too iniquitous to be applied.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Any new rule formed after departing from iniquitous law must cohere as far as possible with the remaining non-iniquitous doctrines and principles of the legal system.
      ?

      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.