Judging Positivism
Margaret Martin - Bloomsbury Publishing, 01 dic 2014
Judging
Positivism is a critical exploration of the method and substance of
legal positivism. Margaret Martin is primarily concerned with the manner
in which theorists who adopt the dominant positivist paradigm ask a
limited set of questions and offer an equally limited set of answers,
artificially circumscribing the field of legal philosophy in the
process. The book focuses primarily but not exclusively on the writings
of prominent legal positivist, Joseph Raz. Martin argues that Raz's
theory has changed over time and that these changes have led to deep
inconsistencies and incoherencies in his account. One re-occurring theme
in the book is that Razian positivism collapses from within. In the
process of defending his own position, Raz is led to support the views
of many of his main rivals, namely, Ronald Dworkin, the legal realists
and the normative positivists. The internal collapse of Razian
positivism proves to be instructive. Promising paths of inquiry come
into view and questions that have been suppressed or marginalised by
positivists re-emerge ready for curious minds to reflect on anew. The
broader vision of jurisprudential inquiry defended in this book
re-connects philosophy with the work of practitioners and the worries of
law's subjects, bringing into focus the relevance of legal philosophy
for lawyers and laymen alike.
