A Path that Forks. Legal Science between Is and Ought
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.4454/analisiediritto.v21i1.360Palabras clave:
pure theory of norms, legal norms, legal statements, legal statements about norms, validity, logic of norms, logic of legal statementsResumen
Distinguishing between law and legal science –between legal norms and the juristic description of norms– is a crucial point for the pure theory. Nonetheless, Kelsen seems unable to give a consistent and satisfactory account of both the wording and the logical form of legal statements (or propositions of law), that is, the sentences by which legal scholars are supposed to describe the law. In particular, he cannot decide whether legal statements are empirical (is-) or normative (ought-) sentences. This is especially clear in his posthumous General Theory of Norms.
Descargas
Publicado
Número
Sección
Licencia
Copyrights are transferred for five years starting publication date from the author(s) to the Publisher. After this period, the content is released under a Creative Commons licence (Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International).