The very idea of legal positivism

Revista Derecho del Estado

View Publication Info
 
 
Field Value
 
Title The very idea of legal positivism
La idea misma del positivismo jurídico
 
Creator Paulson, Stanley
 
Subject Legal Positivism;
Hans Kelsen;
Separation Thesis;
Naturalism;
Normativism
Positivismo jurídico;
Hans Kelsen;
tesis de la separación;
naturalismo;
normativismo
 
Description Recent discussions on legal positivism suggests that the controversy surrounding the notion turns on the distinction between inclusive and exclusive legal positivism. One can acquire a broader perspective by opening up the field in order to cover not only inclusive and exclusive legal positivism but also non-positivism. In any case, I want to argue that a far more fundamental distinction within the positivist camp lies elsewhere. The distinction I have in mind is that between legal positivism qua naturalism (J. Austin) and legal positivism without naturalism (H. Kelsen). For reasons institutional in nature, legal positivism has largely been discussed in a vacuum, there is a standing presumption to the effect that there are ties between legal positivism and ‘positivism writ large’ in the greater philosophical tradition –or, as it would be put in present-day philosophical circles, ties between legal positivism and naturalism. My claim is that it is to be sharply distinguished Kelsen posivist interprise from legal positivism qua naturalism, where the separation principle is simply a corollary of naturalism and where there is of course no nomological normativity thesis.
Gran parte de las discusiones recientes sobre el positivismo jurídico sostienen que la controversia a propósito de éste se cifra en la distinción entre sus versiones incluyente y excluyente. Podemos obtener una perspectiva todavía más amplia de la discusión saliendo del ámbito del positivismo jurídico incluyente y excluyente trayendo a escena también al no-positivismo. En todo caso, en este ensayo quiero defender que existe una distinción más fundamental en otra parte, aún dentro del propio terreno positivista. La distinción que tengo en mente es la que se da entre el positivismo jurídico naturalizado (J. Austin) y el positivismo jurídico no naturalizado (H. Kelsen). Aún y cuando por razones institucionales el positivismo jurídico ha sido ampliamente discutido en el vacío, a menudo suele darse por hecho que existen vínculos entre el positivismo jurídico y el “positivismo en sentido amplio” como tradición o posición filosófica –o, como se diría en los círculos filosóficos en la actualidad–que existen vínculos entre el positivismo jurídico y el naturalismo. Mi tesis es que debe distinguirse claramente la empresa positivista de Kelsen del positivismo jurídico como naturalismo, donde el principio de separación es simplemente un corolario del naturalismo y en el cual no existe, por supuesto, tesis de normatividad nomológica alguna.
 
Publisher Departamento de Derecho Constitucional
 
Date 2019-12-05
 
Type info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
 
Format application/pdf
application/xml
 
Identifier https://revistas.uexternado.edu.co/index.php/derest/article/view/6328
10.18601/01229893.n45.02
 
Source Revista Derecho del Estado; No 45 (2020): Enero-Abril; 29-53
Revista Derecho del Estado; Núm. 45 (2020): Enero-Abril; 29-53
2346-2051
0122-9893
 
Language spa
 
Relation /*ref*/Alexy, Robert, “On the Concept and the Nature of Law”, Ratio Juris, vol. 21, 2008, pp. 281-299.
/*ref*/Alexy, Robert, The Argument from Injustice [1992], trad. de B. Litschewski Paulson y S.L. Paulson, Oxford, Clarendon Press, 2002.
/*ref*/Austin, John, Lectures on Jurisprudence [1863], 5a ed., 2 vols., ed. R. Campbell, Londres, John Murray, 1885.
/*ref*/Austin, John, The Providence of Jurisprudence Determined [1832], ed. de H.L.A. Hart, London, Weidenfeld & Nicolson, 1954.
/*ref*/Bertea, Stefano, “A Critique of Inclusive-Positivism”, Archiv für Rechts- und Sozialphilosophie, núm. 93, 2007, pp. 67-81.
/*ref*/D’Entrèves, Alessandro P., “Two Questions about Law”, Existenz und Ornung. Festchrift für Erik wolf 60. Geburstag, ed. Th. Würtenberger et ál., Frankfurt, Klostermnn, 1962, pp. 309-20, [reimpreso en Natural Law, 2a ed. London, Hutchinson, 1970, pp. 173-84].
/*ref*/Dreier, Horst, “Hans Kelsen’s Wissenschaftsprogramm” Die Verwaltung, Beiheft 7: ‘Staatsrechtslehre als Wissenschaft’, ed. Helmut Schulze-Fielitz, Berlin, Duncker & Humblot, 2007, pp. 81-114.
/*ref*/Dreier, Horst, Rechstslehre, Staatssoziologie und Demokratietheorie bei Hans Kelsen, 2a impression, Baden- Baden: Nomos, 1990.
/*ref*/Finnis, John, Natural Law and Natural Rights, Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1980, [2a. ed., 2011].
/*ref*/Finnis, John, Philosophy of Law. Collected Essays, vol. IV, Oxford, OUP, 2011.
/*ref*/Fodor, Jerry A., Hume Variations, Oxford, Clarendon Press, 2003.
/*ref*/Franks, Paul W., All or Nothing. Systematicity, Tracendental Arguments, and Skepticism in German Idealism, Cambridge, Mass., and London, Harvard University Press, 2005.
/*ref*/Fuller, Lon L., “The Forms and Limits of Adjudication”, Harvard Law Review, núm. 92,1978-9, pp. 353-409 [con omisiones, reimpreso en: The Principles of Social Order, ed. de K. Winston, 2ª ed., Oxford, Hart Publishing, 2001, pp. 101-39].
/*ref*/Habermas, Jürgen, Knowledge and Human Interest [1968], trad. J.J. Shapiro, Boston, Beacon Prees, 1971.
/*ref*/Hart, H. L. A., “Analytical Jurisprudence in Mid-Twentieth Century: A Reply to Professor Bodenheimer”, University of Pennsylvania Law Review, vol. 105, 1956-7, pp. 953-975.
/*ref*/Hart, H. L. A., “Legal and Moral Obligation”, en: Íd., Essays in Moral Philosophy, editado por A. I. Melden., Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1958, pp. 82-107.
/*ref*/Hart, H. L. A., The Concept of Law, 2a. ed., Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1994.
/*ref*/Hart, H.L.A., “Positivism and the Separation of Law and Morals”, Harvard Law Review, n. 71, 1957-8, pp. 593-629; reimpreso en Essays in Jurisprudence and Philosophy, Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1983, pp. 49-87.
/*ref*/Himma, Kenneth Einar, “Inclusive Legal Positivism”, The Oxford Handbook of Jurisprudence and Legal Philosophy, J. Coleman et. ál. (eds.), Oxford, Oxford University Press, oup, pp. 125-65.
/*ref*/Holzhey, Helmut, “Der Neukantianismus”, en: H. Holzhey y W. Röd, Die Philosophie ausgehenden 19. und des 20. Jahrhunderts [Teil] 2. Neukantianismus, Idealismus, Realismus, Phänomenologie, Munich, C. H. Beck, 2004.
/*ref*/Hume, David, A Treatise on Human Nature [1a. ed. 1739-40], 2a. ed. a cargo de P.H. Nidditch, Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1978.
/*ref*/Jell inek, Georg, Allgemeine Staatslehre, 2a. ed., Berlin, O. Häring, 1905; 3a. ed., 1914.
/*ref*/Kelsen, Hans, “Foreword” a la segunda impresión de su obra: Main Problems in the Theory of Public Law, traducción en Normativity and Norms, cit., pp. 3-22.
/*ref*/Kelsen, Hans, “Unrecht und Unrectfolge im Völkerrecht”, Zeitschrift für öffentliches Recht, vol. 12, 1932, pp. 481-608.
/*ref*/Kelsen, Hans, Allgemeine Staatslehre, Berlin, Julius Springer, 1925.
/*ref*/Kelsen, Hans, Das Problem der Souveränität und die Theorie des Völkerrechts, Tübingen, J.C.B. Mohr, 1920.
/*ref*/Kelsen, Hans, General Theory of Law and State, trad. por Anders Wedberg, Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1945.
/*ref*/Kelsen, Hans, Reine Rechstlehre, 2a. ed., Vienna, Franz Deuticke, 1960.
/*ref*/Kelsen, Hans, Hauptprobleme der Staatsrechtslehre, Tübingen: J.C.B. Mohr, 1911; reimpreso en Hans Kelsen Werke, ed. Matthias Jestaedt, vol. 2, Tübingen, Mohr Siebeck, 2008.
/*ref*/Kelsen, Hans, Introduction to the Problems of Legal Theory, trad. 1a. ed. de “Reine Rechtslehre”, 1934, trad. de Bonnie Litschewski Paulson y Stanley L. Paulson, Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1992.
/*ref*/Kelsen, Hans, Über Grenzen zwischen juristischer und soziologischer Methode, Tübingen, J. C. B. Mohr, 1911.
/*ref*/Kelsen, Hans, Werke, editado por Matthías Jestaedt, Tübingen, Mohr Siebeck, 2007.
/*ref*/Kramer, Matt her H., In Defense of Legal Positivism, Oxford, OUP, 1999.
/*ref*/Kramer, Matt her H., Where Law and Morality Meet, Oxford, OUP, 2004.
/*ref*/Lehrer, Keith, Thomas Reid, London and New York, Routledge, 1989
/*ref*/Leiter, Brian, Naturalizing Jurisprudence, Oxford, OUP, 2007.
/*ref*/Maddy, Penelope, Second philosophy. A Naturalistic Method, Oxford, OUP, 2007.
/*ref*/Mill ar, Alan, Understanding People. Normativity and Rationalizing Explanation, Oxford, Clarendon Press, 2004.
/*ref*/Mounce, H. O., Hume’s Naturalism, London & New York, Routledge, 1992.
/*ref*/Nino, Carlos Santiago, “Some Confusions surrounding Kelnsen’s Concept of Validity”, Archiv für Rechts- und Sozialphilosophie, vol. 64, 1978, pp. 357-77, en pp. 357-65; reimpreso en: Normativity and Norms. Critical Perspectives on Kelsenian Themes, editado por Stanley L. Paulson y Bonnie Litschewski Paulson, Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1998, pp. 253-61.
/*ref*/Nino, Carlos Santiago, La validez del derecho, Buenos Aires, Editorial Astrea, 1985.
/*ref*/Penelhum, Terence, “Hume’s Moral Pychology”. En D. Fate Norton (ed.), Cambridge Companion to Hume, Cambridge, cup, 2003, pp. 117-149.
/*ref*/Quine, W. V. O., “Five Milestones of Empiricism” (lección de 1975), en Íd., Theories and Things, Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1981, pp. 67-72.
/*ref*/Radbruch, Gustav, “Statutory Lawlessness and Supra-Statutory Law” [1946], trad. de B. Litschewski Paulson y S.L. Paulson, Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, n. 26, 2006, pp. 1-11.
/*ref*/Rawls, John, Lectures on the History of Political Philosophy, Cambridge, Mass,: Harvard University Press, 2007.
/*ref*/Raz, Joseph, “Explaining Normativity: On Rationality and the Justification of Reason”, Ratio, vol.12, New Series, 1999, 354-379; reimpreso en Íd., Engaging Reason, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1999, pp. 67-89.
/*ref*/Raz, Joseph, “Kelsen´s Theory of the Basic Norm”, American Journal of Jurisprudence, vol. 19, 1974, 94-111; reimpreso en Normativity and Norms, cit., pp. 47-67, y en Raz, The Authority of Law, 2a. ed., Oxford, OUP, pp. 122-145.
/*ref*/Raz, Joseph, Ethics in the Public Domain, Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1994.
/*ref*/Raz, Joseph, The Authority of Law, Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1979.
/*ref*/Reid, Thomas, The Works of Thomas Reid, 8a. ed., 2 vols., ed. William Hamilton, Edinburgh, James Thin, 1895.
/*ref*/Rickert, Heinrich, Der Gegenstand der Erkenntnis, 2a ed., Tübingen and Leipzig: J.C.B. Mohr, 1904.
/*ref*/Rickert, Heinrich, Der Gegenstand der Erkenntnis, 6a. ed., Tübingen J.C.B. Mohr, 1928.
/*ref*/Rickert, Heinrich, Die Grenzen der naturwissenchaftlichen Begriffsbildung [1902], 5a ed., Tübingen J.C.B. Mohr, 1929.
/*ref*/Ross, Alf, “Validity and the Conflict between Legal Positivism and Natural Law”, Revista Juridica de Buenos Aires, vol. 4, 1961, pp. 46-93 (impresión bilingüe); reimpreso en Normativity and Norms, cit. pp. 147-163.
/*ref*/Shapiro, Scott , “Law, Morality, and the Guidance of Conduct”, Legal Theory, n. 6, 2000, pp. 127-170.
/*ref*/Skorupski, John, The Domain of Reasons, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2010.
/*ref*/Smith, Norman Kemp, “The naturalism of Hume (i)’, Mind, vol. 14, 1905, pp. 149-73.
/*ref*/Smith, Norman Kemp, “The Naturalism of Hume (ii)”, Mind, vol. 14, 1905, pp. 335-347.
/*ref*/Smith, Norman Kemp, The Philosophy of David Hume, London, Macmillan, 1941.
/*ref*/Stoll eis, Michael, Public Law in Germany 1800-1914, (edición alemana de 1992), trad. Pamela Biel, New York y Oxford, Berghahn, 2001.
/*ref*/von Helmholt z, Hermann, “Über das Sehen de Menschen”, Vorträge und Reden, 4a. imp., 2 vols., Braunschweig, Friedrich Vieweg, 1896, vol.1, pp. 85-117 (conferencia en Konigsberg,1855).
/*ref*/Walt er, Robert, “Der gegenwärtige Stand der Reinen Rechtslehre”, Rechtstheorie, vol. 1, 1970, pp. 69-95.
/*ref*/Will iams, Bernard, Truth and Truthfulness, Princeton, Princeton University Press, 2002.
https://revistas.uexternado.edu.co/index.php/derest/article/view/6328/8354
https://revistas.uexternado.edu.co/index.php/derest/article/view/6328/8779
 
Rights Derechos de autor 2019 Stanley Paulson
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0
 

Contact Us

The PKP Index is an initiative of the Public Knowledge Project.

For PKP Publishing Services please use the PKP|PS contact form.

For support with PKP software we encourage users to consult our wiki for documentation and search our support forums.

For any other correspondence feel free to contact us using the PKP contact form.

Find Us

Twitter

Copyright © 2015-2018 Simon Fraser University Library