SOBEK, Tomáš. Faultless Disagreement and Jurisprudence. In THE BRIDGE BETWEEN METAETHICS AND JURISPRUDENCE. 2022.
Other formats:   BibTeX LaTeX RIS
Basic information
Original name Faultless Disagreement and Jurisprudence
Name in Czech Bezvadná neshoda a teorie práva
Authors SOBEK, Tomáš.
Edition THE BRIDGE BETWEEN METAETHICS AND JURISPRUDENCE, 2022.
Other information
Original language English
Type of outcome Presentations at conferences
Country of publisher Portugal
Confidentiality degree is not subject to a state or trade secret
Organization unit Faculty of Law
Keywords (in Czech) metaetika; teorie práva
Keywords in English metaethics; jurisprudence
Tags International impact, Reviewed
Changed by Changed by: doc. JUDr. Tomáš Sobek, Ph.D., učo 7664. Changed: 4/3/2022 07:58.
Abstract
Legal thinking seems to allow for the so-called faultless disagreement. For example, two lawyers can disagree on the interpretation of the law without either of them being at fault. But according to classical logic, the occurrence of genuine disagreement necessarily entails the existence of some mistake. Perhaps this problem can be solved by an appropriate choice of non-classical logic. There are a number of proposals, including intuitionistic logic, paraconsistent logic, three-valued logic, truth-relativism, analetheism and falsificationism. The problem of faultless disagreement is even more interesting when applied to jurisprudence itself. We can consider the following thought experiment. Imagine we cognitively idealize some legal positivist and some natural law theorist. Now both are perfectly informed and make no epistemic mistakes. Should we expect their theoretical disagreement to survive this idealization? Or should we expect their views to converge toward agreement? If the second answer applies, should we expect agreement on a particular theory or just agnostic "agreement"? Of course, we don't know what would happen in idealized conditions. We only have some expectations. However, these expectations affect our approach to theoretical disagreements under non-ideal conditions.
Links
GA20-10464S, research and development projectName: Kontextuální vazby justifikace lidských práv jako problém právní filosofie
Investor: Czech Science Foundation
PrintDisplayed: 15/10/2024 04:15