LEADER 04459nam 22006131 450 001 9910823690903321 005 20071218084137.0 010 $a1-4725-6399-9 010 $a1-281-25860-1 010 $a9786611258603 010 $a1-84731-370-1 024 7 $a10.5040/9781472563996 035 $a(CKB)1000000000402796 035 $a(EBL)335261 035 $a(OCoLC)476146958 035 $a(SSID)ssj0000216791 035 $a(PQKBManifestationID)12086402 035 $a(PQKBTitleCode)TC0000216791 035 $a(PQKBWorkID)10197400 035 $a(PQKB)11260018 035 $a(MiAaPQ)EBC1772597 035 $a(OCoLC)646797054 035 $a(UtOrBLW)bpp09256531 035 $a(MiAaPQ)EBC335261 035 $a(Au-PeEL)EBL335261 035 $a(EXLCZ)991000000000402796 100 $a20140929d2007 uy 0 101 0 $aeng 135 $aur|n|---||||| 181 $ctxt 182 $cc 183 $acr 200 10$aOur knowledge of the law $eobjectivity and practice in legal theory /$fGeorge Pavlakos 205 $a1st ed. 210 1$aOxford ;$aPortland, Oregon :$cHart Publishing,$d2007. 215 $a1 online resource (279 p.) 300 $aDescription based upon print version of record. 311 $a1-84113-503-8 320 $aIncludes bibliographical references (pages [249]-258) and index. 327 $aIntroduction -- Part One The Grounds of Knowledge. 1 Knowledge and Objectivity ; 2 Objectivity and Grammar ; 3 Grammar and Rule-following ; 4 Practice, Normativity and Reasons -- Part Two Knowledge and Legal Theory. 5 Conventionalism and the Grammar of Law ; 6 Interpretivism and the Menace of Essentialism ; 7 The Practice Theory of Law ; Concluding Remarks. 330 $a"In the long-standing debate between positivism and non-positivism, legal validity has always been a subject of controversy. While positivists deny that moral values play any role in the determination of legal validity, non-positivists affirm the opposite thesis. In departing from this narrow point of view, the book focuses on the notion of legal knowledge. Apart from what one takes to constitute the grounds of legal validity, there is a more fundamental issue about cognitive validity: how do we acquire knowledge of whatever is assumed to constitute the elements of legal validity? When the question is posed in this form a fundamental shift takes place. Given that knowledge is a philosophical concept, for anything to constitute an adequate ground for legal validity it must satisfy the standards set by knowledge. In exploring those standards the author argues that knowledge is the outcome of an activity of judging, which is constrained by reasons (reflexive). While these reasons may vary with the domain of judging, the reflexive structure of the practice of judging imposes certain constraints on what can constitute a reason for judging. Amongst these constraints are found not only general metaphysical limitations but also the fundamental principle that one with the capacity to judge is autonomous or, in other words, capable of determining the reasons that form the basis of action. One sees, as soon as autonomy has been introduced into the parameters of knowledge, that law is necessarily connected with every other practical domain. The author shows, in the end, that the issue of knowledge is orthogonal to questions about the inclusion or exclusion of morality, for what really matters is whether the putative grounds of legal validity are appropriate to the generation of knowledge. The outcome is far more integral than much work in current theory: neither an absolute deference to either universal moral standards or practice-independent values nor a complete adherence to conventionality and institutional arrangements will do. In suggesting that the current positivism versus non-positivism debate, when it comes to determining law's nature, misses the crux of the matter, the book aims to provoke a fertile new debate in legal theory."--Bloomsbury Publishing. 606 $aEffectiveness and validity of law 606 $aLaw$xPhilosophy 606 $2Jurisprudence & philosophy of law 615 0$aEffectiveness and validity of law. 615 0$aLaw$xPhilosophy. 676 $a340.1 700 $aPavlakos$b George$01599787 801 0$bUtOrBLW 801 1$bUtOrBLW 906 $aBOOK 912 $a9910823690903321 996 $aOur knowledge of the law$93922639 997 $aUNINA