Simple view
Full metadata view
Authors
Statistics
Spór o pojęcie prawa : debaty Hart - Dworkin ciąg dalszy?
Dispute about the notion of law : Hart - Dworkin debate continued?
pojęcie prawa, debata Hart–Dworkin, metodologia prawoznawstwa, inkluzywny pozytywizm prawniczy, ekskluzywny pozytywizm prawniczy
methodology of legal studies, i
exclusive legal positivism
Hart–Dworkin debate,
the concept of law,
nclusive legal positivism,
In 2014 we celebrate the 20th anniversary of publishing H.L.A. Hart’s ‘Postscript to The Concept of Law’, where Hart answers most thoroughly all of the important doubts raised against his theory by R. Dworkin. ‘Postscript’, however, did not cut off the discussions, but inspired new lines of arguments and critique. The article focuses on the main issues of the Hart-Dworkin debate that were discussed by their followers and critics, mainly after the publication of ‘Postscript’. Special attention is paid to methodological issues and the problem of theoretical disagreements. In this context some of the main arguments of such legal philosophers as J. Raz, A. Marmor, G. Postema, and J. Coleman are presented. In the end, a few misinterpretations (including the argument that legal positivism is a stagnant research programme in the sense of I. Lakatos) of legal positivists’ ideas are elucidated.
| dc.abstract.en | In 2014 we celebrate the 20th anniversary of publishing H.L.A. Hart’s ‘Postscript to The Concept of Law’, where Hart answers most thoroughly all of the important doubts raised against his theory by R. Dworkin. ‘Postscript’, however, did not cut off the discussions, but inspired new lines of arguments and critique. The article focuses on the main issues of the Hart-Dworkin debate that were discussed by their followers and critics, mainly after the publication of ‘Postscript’. Special attention is paid to methodological issues and the problem of theoretical disagreements. In this context some of the main arguments of such legal philosophers as J. Raz, A. Marmor, G. Postema, and J. Coleman are presented. In the end, a few misinterpretations (including the argument that legal positivism is a stagnant research programme in the sense of I. Lakatos) of legal positivists’ ideas are elucidated. | pl |
| dc.affiliation | Wydział Prawa i Administracji : Katedra Teorii Prawa | pl |
| dc.contributor.author | Dyrda, Adam - 108878 | pl |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2015-04-15T13:00:44Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2015-04-15T13:00:44Z | |
| dc.date.issued | 2014 | pl |
| dc.description.number | 4 (818) | pl |
| dc.description.physical | 3-18 | pl |
| dc.description.points | 6 | pl |
| dc.description.publication | 1,1 | pl |
| dc.description.volume | 69 | pl |
| dc.identifier.issn | 0031-0980 | pl |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://ruj.uj.edu.pl/xmlui/handle/item/5080 | |
| dc.language | pol | pl |
| dc.language.container | pol | pl |
| dc.participation | Dyrda, Adam: 100%; | pl |
| dc.rights | Dodaję tylko opis bibliograficzny | * |
| dc.rights.licence | Bez licencji otwartego dostępu | |
| dc.rights.uri | * | |
| dc.subject.en | methodology of legal studies, i | pl |
| dc.subject.en | exclusive legal positivism | pl |
| dc.subject.en | Hart–Dworkin debate, | pl |
| dc.subject.en | the concept of law, | pl |
| dc.subject.en | nclusive legal positivism, | pl |
| dc.subject.pl | pojęcie prawa, debata Hart–Dworkin, metodologia prawoznawstwa, inkluzywny pozytywizm prawniczy, ekskluzywny pozytywizm prawniczy | pl |
| dc.subtype | Article | pl |
| dc.title | Spór o pojęcie prawa : debaty Hart - Dworkin ciąg dalszy? | pl |
| dc.title.alternative | Dispute about the notion of law : Hart - Dworkin debate continued? | pl |
| dc.title.journal | Państwo i Prawo | pl |
| dc.type | JournalArticle | pl |
| dspace.entity.type | Publication |