Morality and Law 3

Morality and Law 3 - Ch 7 Tuesday, February 01, 2011 12:30...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ch 7 Tuesday, February 01, 2011 12:30 PM Main ideas 1. Open-texture of law 2. Objection to hart's view: rule skepticism i. General form talk of rules as myth (236) ii. Moderate from: the only rules that exist are those that constitute courts(137) iii. Functional form: judges are not bound by rules (138) iv. Finality/infallibility form: judges are supreme deciders (141-147) 3. Is the rule of recognition itself open-textured? 2. What does Hart mean by law being open-textured? 1. Apply laws to diff cases 2. General laws 3. Application of law is not always determinate with regard to particular (hard) cases (128) i. Why i. Laws must be put in general terms so we must make choices when we apply them in particular cases ii. 2 reasons a.Ignorance of facts b. Indeterminacy of aim 4. Examples i. No vehicles in the park 5. Why is this a problem for Hart-like theories? i. Two extremes i. Formalism ii. Rule skepticism 6. How should legal theory deal with this problem? i.
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Image of page 2
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 05/23/2011 for the course PHIL 280 taught by Professor Hubbs during the Spring '08 term at UNC.

Page1 / 2

Morality and Law 3 - Ch 7 Tuesday, February 01, 2011 12:30...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 2. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online