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
    The basic norm must be presupposed rather than derived fr... — Carmelics
    Home/Truth & Knowledge
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    The basic norm must be presupposed rather than derived from a higher legal norm

    Social 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.Every legal norm that creates or modifies law derives its legal significance from some other legal norm
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The chain of legal norms conferring validity on law-creating acts must terminate at some point
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.At the point where no higher legal norm exists to confer validity, legal validity must be presupposed
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.The terminus of legal validity can be grounded in social facts—habitual obedience or rule of recognition—rather than a presupposed norm.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Hart's rule of recognition derives its authority from official practice and acceptance, not transcendental presupposition.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A norm grounded in sociological fact is more epistemically tractable than one requiring neo-Kantian presupposition without empirical content.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Presupposing a basic norm conflates the conditions for describing a legal system with the conditions for its actual validity.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Dworkin's interpretivism demonstrates that legal validity is determined by moral principles embedded in legal practice, not by a presupposed terminal norm.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If moral facts can terminate the regress of validity, the basic norm is not merely presupposed but substantively constrained by justice.
      ?

      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

    Truth & KnowledgeSocial Contract

    Connections

    1 topic

    Philosophy of Language3 linked

    Related

    A norm grounded in sociological fact is more epistemically tractable than one re...At the point where no higher legal norm exists to confer validity, legal validit...Dworkin's interpretivism demonstrates that legal validity is determined by moral...Every legal norm that creates or modifies law derives its legal significance fro...
    +5 moreShow less
    Hart's rule of recognition derives its authority from official practice and acce...If moral facts can terminate the regress of validity, the basic norm is not mere...Presupposing a basic norm conflates the conditions for describing a legal system...The chain of legal norms conferring validity on law-creating acts must terminate...The terminus of legal validity can be grounded in social facts—habitual obedienc...

    Similar

    The basic norm must be presupposed rather than derived from positive l...95%The basic norm is presupposed only by those who accept the normative v...90%Kelsen's presupposition of a basic norm is optional, not rationally co...88%At the point where no higher legal norm exists to confer validity, leg...87%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: lawphil-theory
    View source passageHide passage
    In Kelsen’s argument, P stands for the fact that legal norms are “ought” statements , and Q is the presupposition of the basic norm. In other words, the necessary presupposition of the basic norm is derived from the possibility conditions for ascribing legal significance to actions and events. In order to interpret an action as one of creating or modifying the law, it is necessary to show that the relevant legal significance of the act/event is conferred on it by some other legal norm. At some p
    Extraction notes

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

    Details

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