British Utilitarianism after Bentham: Nineteenth-Century Foundations of International Law II

R. Schütze
{"title":"British Utilitarianism after Bentham: Nineteenth-Century Foundations of International Law II","authors":"R. Schütze","doi":"10.1163/15718050-bja10090","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nWhat are the legal principles of British utilitarianism in the long nineteenth century; and what conception(s) of international law do they offer? The celebrated founder of the utilitarian school is Jeremy Bentham, who categorically rejects all metaphysical natural law thinking by insisting that all positive law ought to be adopted by a legislature. But in the absence of a world legislature, what did this mean for the positivity and normativity of international law? Surprisingly, Bentham and a second generation of utilitarian thinkers can affirm the legally binding nature of international law; yet with John Austin, a radical ‘sovereigntist’ critique subsequently casts doubt over the nature of international law as law ‘properly so called’. This infamous scepticism would have a profound impact on British international thought in the twentieth century; yet in the nineteenth century, the ideas of a third-generation utilitarian became more prominent: the liberal philosophy of John Stuart Mill. Mill’s ‘relativist’ and ‘civilisational’ conception of international law thereby gave the utilitarian project a specifically imperialist dimension that will be analysed, both in its utilitarian-philosophical and practical-legal dimensions. The article however also explores two other legacies of British utilitarianism, namely: the rise of international codification and the emergence of a specifically British conception of private international law during the nineteenth century.","PeriodicalId":43459,"journal":{"name":"JOURNAL OF THE HISTORY OF INTERNATIONAL LAW","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JOURNAL OF THE HISTORY OF INTERNATIONAL LAW","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15718050-bja10090","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

What are the legal principles of British utilitarianism in the long nineteenth century; and what conception(s) of international law do they offer? The celebrated founder of the utilitarian school is Jeremy Bentham, who categorically rejects all metaphysical natural law thinking by insisting that all positive law ought to be adopted by a legislature. But in the absence of a world legislature, what did this mean for the positivity and normativity of international law? Surprisingly, Bentham and a second generation of utilitarian thinkers can affirm the legally binding nature of international law; yet with John Austin, a radical ‘sovereigntist’ critique subsequently casts doubt over the nature of international law as law ‘properly so called’. This infamous scepticism would have a profound impact on British international thought in the twentieth century; yet in the nineteenth century, the ideas of a third-generation utilitarian became more prominent: the liberal philosophy of John Stuart Mill. Mill’s ‘relativist’ and ‘civilisational’ conception of international law thereby gave the utilitarian project a specifically imperialist dimension that will be analysed, both in its utilitarian-philosophical and practical-legal dimensions. The article however also explores two other legacies of British utilitarianism, namely: the rise of international codification and the emergence of a specifically British conception of private international law during the nineteenth century.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
边沁之后的英国功利主义:19世纪国际法的基础2
在漫长的19世纪,英国功利主义的法律原则是什么?他们提供了什么样的国际法概念?著名的功利主义学派创始人是杰里米·边沁,他断然拒绝一切形而上学的自然法思想,坚持一切成文法都应由立法机关采用。但是,在没有世界立法机构的情况下,这对国际法的积极性和规范性意味着什么?令人惊讶的是,边沁和第二代功利主义思想家能够肯定国际法的法律约束力;然而,在约翰·奥斯汀的著作中,激进的“主权主义者”批判随后对国际法作为“所谓的”法律的本质提出了质疑。这种臭名昭著的怀疑主义对20世纪英国的国际思想产生了深远的影响;然而在19世纪,第三代功利主义思想变得更加突出:约翰·斯图亚特·密尔的自由主义哲学。因此,密尔的“相对主义”和“文明”的国际法概念赋予了功利主义计划一个具体的帝国主义维度,我们将从功利主义哲学和实践法律两个维度对其进行分析。然而,本文还探讨了英国功利主义的另外两个遗产,即:19世纪国际法典化的兴起和英国特有的国际私法概念的出现。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
14.30%
发文量
23
期刊介绍: The object of the Journal of the History of International Law/Revue d"histoire du droit international is to contribute to the effort to make intelligible the international legal past, however varied and eccentric it may be, to stimulate interest in the whys, the whats and wheres of international legal development, without projecting present relationships upon the past, and to promote the application of a sense of proportion to the study of current international legal problems. The aim of the Journal is to open fields of inquiry, to enable new questions to be asked, to be awake to and always aware of the plurality of human civilizations and cultures, past and present.
期刊最新文献
International Lawyers as Hope Mongers: How Did We Come to Believe That Democracy Was Here to Stay? The (Latin) American Dream? Human Rights and the Construction of Inter-American Regional Organisation (1945–1948) Regional Imaginations of Peace: The Work of the Rio Committee and the Antecedents of the Pact of Bogota (1942–1947) Locating the 1948 Economic Agreement of Bogotá: The Rise and Fall of Latin America’s International Economic Law Project Organizing Peace in the Americas: Collective Security versus International Adjudication
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1