Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
- Keyword
-
- Law (2)
- Argumentation (1)
- Chaim Perelman (1)
- Civility (1)
- Courtesy (1)
-
- Courts (1)
- Hypocrisy (1)
- Judicial Process (1)
- Jurisprudence (1)
- Law Moral and Political Philosophy (1)
- Legal ethics--philosophy (1)
- Legitimacy (1)
- Lucie Olbrechts-Tyteca (1)
- Mental Health (1)
- Natural Law (1)
- Philosophy (1)
- Politeness (1)
- Psychology and Psychiatry (1)
- Public Opinion (1)
- Public law & legal theory (1)
- Rhetoric (1)
- Rule of Law (1)
- Social, political & legal philosophy (1)
- The New Rhetoric (1)
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Jurisprudence
The Intelligibility Of Extralegal State Action: A General Lesson For Debates On Public Emergencies And Legality, François Tanguay-Renaud
The Intelligibility Of Extralegal State Action: A General Lesson For Debates On Public Emergencies And Legality, François Tanguay-Renaud
Articles & Book Chapters
Some legal theorists deny that states can conceivably act extralegally in the sense of acting contrary to domestic law. This position finds its most robust articulation in the writings of Hans Kelsen and has more recently been taken up by David Dyzenhaus in the context of his work on emergencies and legality. This paper seeks to demystify their arguments and ultimately contend that we can intelligibly speak of the state as a legal wrongdoer or a legally unauthorized actor.
All Judges Are Political—Except When They Are Not: Acceptable Hypocrisies And The Rule Of Law, Keith J. Bybee
All Judges Are Political—Except When They Are Not: Acceptable Hypocrisies And The Rule Of Law, Keith J. Bybee
College of Law - Faculty Scholarship
This paper contains the introduction to the new book, All Judges Are Political—Except When They Are Not: Acceptable Hypocrisies and the Rule of Law (Stanford University Press, 2010).
The book begins with the observation that Americans are divided in their beliefs about whether courts operate on the basis of unbiased legal principle or of political interest. This division in public opinion in turn breeds suspicion that judges do not actually mean what they say, that judicial professions of impartiality are just fig leaves used to hide the pursuit of partisan purposes.
Comparing law to the practice of common courtesy, the …
Perelman's Theory Of Argumentation And Natural Law, Francis J. Mootz Iii
Perelman's Theory Of Argumentation And Natural Law, Francis J. Mootz Iii
Scholarly Works
Chaim Perelman resuscitated the rhetorical tradition by developing an elegant and detailed theory of argumentation. Rejecting the single-minded Cartesian focus on rational truth, Perelman recovered the ancient wisdom that we can argue reasonably about matters that admit only of probability. From this one would conclude that Perelman’s argumentation theory is inalterably opposed to natural law, and therefore that I would have done better to have written an article titled “Perelman’s Th eory of Argumentation as a Rejection of Natural Law.”
However, my thesis is precisely that Perelman’s theory of argumentation connects to the natural law tradition in interesting and productive …
Mental Disorders And The "System Of Judgmental Responsibility", Anita L. Allen
Mental Disorders And The "System Of Judgmental Responsibility", Anita L. Allen
All Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.