重视身份认同:论法律制度个性化的政治

IF 1.4 2区 社会学 Q1 LAW Oxford Journal of Legal Studies Pub Date : 2021-10-26 DOI:10.1093/ojls/gqab040
Cormac Mac Amhlaigh
{"title":"重视身份认同:论法律制度个性化的政治","authors":"Cormac Mac Amhlaigh","doi":"10.1093/ojls/gqab040","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article examines the question of the identity of legal systems of non-monistic accounts of law. It critically analyses approaches to individuation based on validity, the nature of individual norms and the purposes for which they are applied, arguing that the latter approach, as endorsed particularly by Raz, offers the most convincing approach to the question of individuation. The article argues that Raz’s own criterion, however, is under-inclusive and misses important reasons why a norm should be individuated in a particular way. The article defends an approach to individuation which builds upon and expands Raz’s approach. This approach emphasises the political importance of legal systems as providing the basis for criteria of individuation. These criteria are also relevant for Dworkin’s account of law as integrity, which, the article argues, also relies on an understanding of individuation notwithstanding Dworkin’s claims to the contrary.","PeriodicalId":47225,"journal":{"name":"Oxford Journal of Legal Studies","volume":"53 24","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Taking Identity Seriously: On the Politics of the Individuation of Legal Systems\",\"authors\":\"Cormac Mac Amhlaigh\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/ojls/gqab040\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article examines the question of the identity of legal systems of non-monistic accounts of law. It critically analyses approaches to individuation based on validity, the nature of individual norms and the purposes for which they are applied, arguing that the latter approach, as endorsed particularly by Raz, offers the most convincing approach to the question of individuation. The article argues that Raz’s own criterion, however, is under-inclusive and misses important reasons why a norm should be individuated in a particular way. The article defends an approach to individuation which builds upon and expands Raz’s approach. This approach emphasises the political importance of legal systems as providing the basis for criteria of individuation. These criteria are also relevant for Dworkin’s account of law as integrity, which, the article argues, also relies on an understanding of individuation notwithstanding Dworkin’s claims to the contrary.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47225,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Oxford Journal of Legal Studies\",\"volume\":\"53 24\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-10-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Oxford Journal of Legal Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/ojls/gqab040\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Oxford Journal of Legal Studies","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/ojls/gqab040","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文探讨了法律的非一元论帐户的法律制度的同一性问题。它批判性地分析了基于有效性的个性化方法,个人规范的性质及其应用的目的,认为后一种方法,特别是Raz所赞同的,为个性化问题提供了最令人信服的方法。文章认为,拉兹自己的标准,然而,是不全面的,并错过了重要的原因,为什么一个规范应该以一种特定的方式个性化。本文为建立并扩展Raz方法的个性化方法进行了辩护。这种做法强调了法律制度的政治重要性,因为它为个性化标准提供了基础。这些标准也与德沃金将法律视为完整性的描述相关,文章认为,这也依赖于对个性化的理解,尽管德沃金的主张与之相反。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Taking Identity Seriously: On the Politics of the Individuation of Legal Systems
This article examines the question of the identity of legal systems of non-monistic accounts of law. It critically analyses approaches to individuation based on validity, the nature of individual norms and the purposes for which they are applied, arguing that the latter approach, as endorsed particularly by Raz, offers the most convincing approach to the question of individuation. The article argues that Raz’s own criterion, however, is under-inclusive and misses important reasons why a norm should be individuated in a particular way. The article defends an approach to individuation which builds upon and expands Raz’s approach. This approach emphasises the political importance of legal systems as providing the basis for criteria of individuation. These criteria are also relevant for Dworkin’s account of law as integrity, which, the article argues, also relies on an understanding of individuation notwithstanding Dworkin’s claims to the contrary.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
8.30%
发文量
31
期刊介绍: The Oxford Journal of Legal Studies is published on behalf of the Faculty of Law in the University of Oxford. It is designed to encourage interest in all matters relating to law, with an emphasis on matters of theory and on broad issues arising from the relationship of law to other disciplines. No topic of legal interest is excluded from consideration. In addition to traditional questions of legal interest, the following are all within the purview of the journal: comparative and international law, the law of the European Community, legal history and philosophy, and interdisciplinary material in areas of relevance.
期刊最新文献
Ships of State and Empty Vessels: Critical Reflections on ‘Territorial Status in International Law’ Forum Marketing in International Commercial Courts? Corporate Purpose Swings as a Social, Atheoretical Process: Will the Pendulum Break? Applying Laws Across Time: Disentangling the ‘Always Speaking’ Principles ‘Hard AI Crime’: The Deterrence Turn
×
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