Abstract

Legal philosophers make a number of bold, contentious claims about the nature of law. For instance, some claim that law necessarily involves coercion, while others disagree. Some claim that all law enjoys presumptive moral validity, while others disagree. We can see these claims in at least three, mutually exclusive ways: (1) We can see them as descriptions of law's nature (descriptivism), (2) we can see them as expressing non-descriptive attitudes of the legal philosophers in question (expressivism), or (3) we can see them as practical claims about how we should view law or order our society (pragmatism). This paper argues that we should understand these claims in the pragmatist way, as claims about how we should view law or order society.

Comments

33 Can. J. L. & Jurisprudence 85 (2020)

Keywords

Law, Law & ethics, Expressivism (Ethics), Pragmatism, Philosophy of law, Sociological jurisprudence, Duress (Law)

Date of Authorship for this Version

2-2020

Volume Number

33

Issue Number

1

First Page

85

Last Page

106

Download

Included in

Law Commons

Share

COinS