Abstract
In this response to eight commentaries on my article "Kelsen, Hart, and legal normativity" I clarify some points in my original analysis and agree with some comments regarding work that still needs to be done. In particular, I attempt to distinguish my position from both Berkeleyan idealism and mere subjective perception. I agree with the commentators who urge that more must be done to analyze the nature of normativity in general, and legal normativity in particular.
| Original language | English (US) |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 1-9 |
| Number of pages | 9 |
| Journal | Revus |
| Volume | 37 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - 2019 |
Bibliographical note
Publisher Copyright:© Revus. All rights reserved.
Keywords
- Externalism
- Foundational norms
- Hart (HLA)
- Idealism
- Internalism
- Kelsen (Hans)
- Legal normativity
- Paulson (Stanley)
- Practice theory of norms
- Raz (Joseph)