Merely Words. Notes for a Defense of Radical Skepticism

Abstract

This paper aims to develop, based on some theses recently formulated by Pierluigi Chiassoni, a defense of (so-called) “extreme skepticism”. In particular, I will highlight how, reconstructed through Chiassoni’s theses, the positions of central authors of the American realist tradition such as Gray, Cohen, Llewellyn and Frank are capable of refuting some of the recurring criticisms of interpretive skepticism, such as its (alleged) inability to account for the existence of stable and shared interpretations in the legal community. Indeed, far from being a position characterized by indefensible irrationality, “extreme skepticism” can make significant contributions to the contemporary literature on legal interpretation.