Skip to main content

2017 | OriginalPaper | Buchkapitel

7. Hans Kelsen and Practical Reason

verfasst von : Francesco Viola

Erschienen in: Kelsenian Legal Science and the Nature of Law

Verlag: Springer International Publishing

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

The critique of practical reason, in all its possible forms, has a far more important and decisive role in Kelsen’s thought than the rejection of Natural law doctrine. Admitting that a practical use of reason is legitimate, namely, that there is a possible connection between intellect and will, would mean destroying the whole foundation of the scientific undertaking of the Pure Theory of law and its conception of the legal norm, which is its central aspect. By depriving practical reason of all foundation, any reference to agency and practical deliberation is excluded from Kelsen’s theory of law. Consequently, the Ought loses all capacity of attraction and motivation of human action, rendering Kelsen’s normativity inert. This chapter intends to show that Kelsen’s enterprise of purifying legal science only attains its fulfilment when the practical dimension of reason itself is eradicated, along with the sociological or political or ideological aspects of law; and in this way the Pure Theory of law is forced to forgo some of its distinctive features, as is evident in Kelsen’s final works; and that the demise of practical reason strongly destabilizes the Pure Theory of law itself.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Versicherung + Risiko




Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Fußnoten
1
I refer in particular to conceptions of law as argumentation, namely, those for which legal reasoning is not only an aspect of the concept of law, but its heart. Cf. for instance Alexy 1978, 1987 and also, more recently, Atienza 2013.
 
2
Here I agree with the interpretative thesis that the final version of Kelsen’s Pure Theory of law, though marking a surprising break with his own lifelong effort to show the scientific character of his theory of law, is wholly logically consistent with the way in which Kelsen connects legal norms to human volition. Cf. for instance Duxbury 2007.
 
3
For the main issues raised by the General Theory of Norms, in particular the doctrine of basic norm and the role of logic in law, cf. Paulson 1992a; Conte 1998 and Celano 1998.
 
4
When in the last decade of his life Kelsen gave up the idea that one norm can be logically derived from another, practical reason too in theoretical terms wholly disappears.
 
5
“As a matter of fact, there is no natural-law doctrine of any importance which has not an essentially religious character” (Kelsen 1949b, 482).
 
6
The reduction to natural law is a confutative argument that Kelsen uses other times, as in the case of the Rule of Law expunged from the Pure Theory of law with the accusation of being “a natural law prejudice” (Kelsen 1992, 105).
 
7
On the main conceptions of practical reason, see Cullity and Gaut 1997. See, also, Wiland 2002.
 
8
“Norma honestatis […] theoretica est., indicans, quaenam sint actiones intrinsece bonae vel malae” (Cathrein 1945, 146).
 
9
See, for instance, the criticisms by George 2000.
 
10
“The self-contradictory concept of practical reason, which is both knowing and willing, and in which the duality of Is and Ought is therefore resolved, is the basis of Kant’s ethics” (Kelsen 1991, 80).
 
11
“As is obvious from the foregoing, the Basic Norm of a positive moral or legal system is not a positive norm, but a merely thought norm (i.e., a fictitious norm), the meaning of a merely fictitious, and not a real, act of will” (Kelsen 1991, 256).
 
12
“From the point of the view of ethical and legal positivism, the only norms considered to be objects of cognition are positive norms, that is, norm posited by acts of will, and indeed, by human acts of will” (Kelsen 1991, 4).
 
13
“The Pure Theory of law is a theory of positive law, of positive law as such, and not of any special system of law. It is general legal theory, not an interpretation of particular national or international legal norms” (Kelsen 1992, 7).
 
14
“The norm is not concerned with a human being in all that he is and does; it is only with a certain human behaviour that it is concerned when it decrees it to be obligatory” (Kelsen 1991, 29).
 
15
For the difference between an inward-looking approach and an outward-looking approach, which alone can guarantee the guiding function of a norm, cf. Rodriguez-Blanco 2014, 118–121.
 
16
“An act whose meaning is that another person (or persons) is to behave in a certain way” (Kelsen 1991, 2).
 
17
On intentionality in Kelsen’s thought, see Rodriguez-Blanco 2014, 101–121.
 
18
“Only the person positing the norm by an act of will – and not the norm itself – can aim for something or pursue an end, for only a person can want something; a norm does not ‘want’ anything” (Kelsen 1991, 11).
 
19
Cf. the criticisms of Aristotle in Kelsen 1991, 67–70.
 
20
See, also, Rundle 2012.
 
21
“The statement about a necessary relation between willing the end and willing the means is true only if it means that the relation between the means as cause and the end as effect is one of causal necessity” (Kelsen 1991, 18).
 
22
Cf., as first reference, Kelsen 1911 and the texts collected in Paulson 1992b.
 
23
For a critical evaluation of the Kelsenian distinction between subjective and objective meaning,see Vinx 2007, 32–37.
 
24
On this theme cf. Raz 1998.
 
25
“The saying ‘Who wills the end, must will the means’ is the answer to the question ‘What must I do in order to realize a certain end?’, and this is a different question from ‘What ought I to do?’” (Kelsen 1991, 9).
 
26
However, Kelsen does not take in account this epistemological difference when he examines the close connection, in Aristotelian thought, between metaphysics and politics. He understands the dualism between the best constitution in itself and the more suitable constitution as an ambiguity (Kelsen 1937).
 
Literatur
Zurück zum Zitat Alexy, Robert. 1978. Theorie der juristischen Argumentation: Die Theorie des rationalen Diskurses als Theorie der juristischen Begründung. Suhrkamp: Frankfurt a. M. Alexy, Robert. 1978. Theorie der juristischen Argumentation: Die Theorie des rationalen Diskurses als Theorie der juristischen Begründung. Suhrkamp: Frankfurt a. M.
Zurück zum Zitat ———. 1987. Rechtssystem und praktische Vernunft. Rechtstheorie 18 (4): 405–419. ———. 1987. Rechtssystem und praktische Vernunft. Rechtstheorie 18 (4): 405–419.
Zurück zum Zitat Atienza, Manuel. 2013. Curso de argumentación jurídica. Madrid: Trotta. Atienza, Manuel. 2013. Curso de argumentación jurídica. Madrid: Trotta.
Zurück zum Zitat Aubenque, Pierre. 2014. La Prudence chez Aristote. 6th ed. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France. Aubenque, Pierre. 2014. La Prudence chez Aristote. 6th ed. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.
Zurück zum Zitat Bjarup, Jes. 2013. Kelsen and Hägerström: Clearing up Misunderstandings and Mapping out the Common Ground. In Kelsen Revisited. New Essays on the Pure Theory of Law, edited by Luís Duarte d’Almeida et al., 163–194. Oxford: Hart Publishing. Bjarup, Jes. 2013. Kelsen and Hägerström: Clearing up Misunderstandings and Mapping out the Common Ground. In Kelsen Revisited. New Essays on the Pure Theory of Law, edited by Luís Duarte d’Almeida et al., 163–194. Oxford: Hart Publishing.
Zurück zum Zitat Cathrein, Victore. 1945. Philosophia moralis in usum Scholarum (1893). Barcelona: Herder. Cathrein, Victore. 1945. Philosophia moralis in usum Scholarum (1893). Barcelona: Herder.
Zurück zum Zitat Celano, Bruno. 1990. Dover essere e intenzionalità. Una critica all’ultimo Kelsen. Turin: Giappichelli. Celano, Bruno. 1990. Dover essere e intenzionalità. Una critica all’ultimo Kelsen. Turin: Giappichelli.
Zurück zum Zitat ———. 1998. Norm Conflicts: Kelsen’s View in the Late Period and a Rejoinder. In Normativity and Norms. Critical Perspectives on Kelsenian Themes, edited by Stanley L. Paulson and Bonnie Litschewski Paulson, 343–361. Oxford: Clarendon Press. ———. 1998. Norm Conflicts: Kelsen’s View in the Late Period and a Rejoinder. In Normativity and Norms. Critical Perspectives on Kelsenian Themes, edited by Stanley L. Paulson and Bonnie Litschewski Paulson, 343–361. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Zurück zum Zitat Conte, Amedeo G. 1998. Hans Kelsen’s Deontics. In Normativity and Norms. Critical Perspectives on Kelsenian Themes, edited by Stanley L. Paulson and Bonnie Litschewski Paulson, 331–341. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Conte, Amedeo G. 1998. Hans Kelsen’s Deontics. In Normativity and Norms. Critical Perspectives on Kelsenian Themes, edited by Stanley L. Paulson and Bonnie Litschewski Paulson, 331–341. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Zurück zum Zitat Cullity, Garrett, and Berys Gaut, eds. 1997. Ethics and Practical Reason. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Cullity, Garrett, and Berys Gaut, eds. 1997. Ethics and Practical Reason. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Zurück zum Zitat d’Almeida Luís, Duarte, John Gardner, and Leslie Green, eds. 2013. Kelsen Revisited. New Essays on the Pure Theory of Law. Oxford: Hart Publishing. d’Almeida Luís, Duarte, John Gardner, and Leslie Green, eds. 2013. Kelsen Revisited. New Essays on the Pure Theory of Law. Oxford: Hart Publishing.
Zurück zum Zitat Duxbury, Neil. 2007. The Basic Norm: An Unsolved Murder Mystery. LSE Law, Society and Economy Working Papers 17: 1–10. Duxbury, Neil. 2007. The Basic Norm: An Unsolved Murder Mystery. LSE Law, Society and Economy Working Papers 17: 1–10.
Zurück zum Zitat Finnis, John. 2003. Law and What I Truly Should Decide. The American Journal of Jurisprudence 48: 107–129.CrossRef Finnis, John. 2003. Law and What I Truly Should Decide. The American Journal of Jurisprudence 48: 107–129.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Fuller, Lon L. 1955. Freedom: A Suggested Analysis. Harvard Law Review 68 (8): 1305–1325.CrossRef Fuller, Lon L. 1955. Freedom: A Suggested Analysis. Harvard Law Review 68 (8): 1305–1325.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat ———. 1969. The Morality of Law, revised edition. New Haven/London: Yale University Press. ———. 1969. The Morality of Law, revised edition. New Haven/London: Yale University Press.
Zurück zum Zitat Gardner, John. 2001. Legal Positivism: 5½ Myths. The American Journal of Jurisprudence 46: 199–227.CrossRef Gardner, John. 2001. Legal Positivism: 5½ Myths. The American Journal of Jurisprudence 46: 199–227.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat George, Robert P. 2000. Kelsen and Aquinas on the Natural-Law Doctrine. Notre Dame Law Review 75: 1625–1646. George, Robert P. 2000. Kelsen and Aquinas on the Natural-Law Doctrine. Notre Dame Law Review 75: 1625–1646.
Zurück zum Zitat Guastini, Riccardo. 2013. The Basic Norm Revisited. In Kelsen Revisited. New Essays on the Pure Theory of Law, edited by Luís Duarte d’Almeida et al., 63–74. Oxford: Hart Publishing. Guastini, Riccardo. 2013. The Basic Norm Revisited. In Kelsen Revisited. New Essays on the Pure Theory of Law, edited by Luís Duarte d’Almeida et al., 63–74. Oxford: Hart Publishing.
Zurück zum Zitat Hartney, Michael. 1993. The Death of Practical Reason in Kelsen’s Later Philosophy. In Praktische Vernunft, Gesetzgebung und Rechtswissenschaft, edited by Waldemar Schreckenberger and Christian Starck, 77–82. Stuttgart: Steiner Verlag. Hartney, Michael. 1993. The Death of Practical Reason in Kelsen’s Later Philosophy. In Praktische Vernunft, Gesetzgebung und Rechtswissenschaft, edited by Waldemar Schreckenberger and Christian Starck, 77–82. Stuttgart: Steiner Verlag.
Zurück zum Zitat Heuer, Ulrike. 2004. Reasons for Actions and Desires. Philosophical Studies 121: 43–63.CrossRef Heuer, Ulrike. 2004. Reasons for Actions and Desires. Philosophical Studies 121: 43–63.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Jodl, Friedrich. 1906. Geschichte der Ethik als philosophische Wissenschaft. 2nd ed. Stuttgart/Berlin: Cotta. Jodl, Friedrich. 1906. Geschichte der Ethik als philosophische Wissenschaft. 2nd ed. Stuttgart/Berlin: Cotta.
Zurück zum Zitat ———. 1908a. Lehrbuch der Psychologie. Vol. 1. 3rd ed. Stuttgart/Berlin: Cotta. ———. 1908a. Lehrbuch der Psychologie. Vol. 1. 3rd ed. Stuttgart/Berlin: Cotta.
Zurück zum Zitat ———. 1908b. Lehrbuch der Psychologie. Vol. 2. 3rd ed. Stuttgart/Berlin: Cotta. ———. 1908b. Lehrbuch der Psychologie. Vol. 2. 3rd ed. Stuttgart/Berlin: Cotta.
Zurück zum Zitat Kelsen, Hans. 1911. Über Grenzen zwischen juristischer und soziologischer Methode. Tübingen: Mohr. Kelsen, Hans. 1911. Über Grenzen zwischen juristischer und soziologischer Methode. Tübingen: Mohr.
Zurück zum Zitat ———. 1923. Hauptprobleme der Staatsrechtslehre, entwickelt aus der Lehre vom Rechtssatze. 2nd ed. Tübingen: J.C.B. Mohr. ———. 1923. Hauptprobleme der Staatsrechtslehre, entwickelt aus der Lehre vom Rechtssatze. 2nd ed. Tübingen: J.C.B. Mohr.
Zurück zum Zitat ———. 1927–1928. Naturrecht und positives Recht: eine Untersuchung ihres gegenseitige Verhältnisses. Internationale Zeitschrift für Rechtstheorie 2: 71–94. ———. 1927–1928. Naturrecht und positives Recht: eine Untersuchung ihres gegenseitige Verhältnisses. Internationale Zeitschrift für Rechtstheorie 2: 71–94.
Zurück zum Zitat ———. 1928. Die Idee des Naturrechtes. Zeitschrift für öffentliches Recht 7: 221–250. ———. 1928. Die Idee des Naturrechtes. Zeitschrift für öffentliches Recht 7: 221–250.
Zurück zum Zitat ———. 1933. Die platonische Gerechtigkeit. Kant-Studien 38: 91–117.CrossRef ———. 1933. Die platonische Gerechtigkeit. Kant-Studien 38: 91–117.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat ———. 1937. The Philosophy of Aristotle and the Hellenic-macedonian Policy. International Journal of Ethics 48 (1): 1–64.CrossRef ———. 1937. The Philosophy of Aristotle and the Hellenic-macedonian Policy. International Journal of Ethics 48 (1): 1–64.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat ———. 1941. The Law as a Specific Social Technique. The University of Chicago Law Review 9: 75–97.CrossRef ———. 1941. The Law as a Specific Social Technique. The University of Chicago Law Review 9: 75–97.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat ———. 1949a. Natural Law Doctrine and Legal Positivism (1928), 389–446. In General Theory of Law and State. Trans. Kraus, W.H. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. ———. 1949a. Natural Law Doctrine and Legal Positivism (1928), 389–446. In General Theory of Law and State. Trans. Kraus, W.H. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Zurück zum Zitat ———. 1949b. The Natural-Law Doctrine Before the Tribunal of Science. The Western Political Quarterly 2 (4): 481–513.CrossRef ———. 1949b. The Natural-Law Doctrine Before the Tribunal of Science. The Western Political Quarterly 2 (4): 481–513.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat ———. 1955–1956. A “Dynamic” Theory of Natural Law. Louisiana Law Review 16: 597–620. ———. 1955–1956. A “Dynamic” Theory of Natural Law. Louisiana Law Review 16: 597–620.
Zurück zum Zitat ———. 1960a. Plato and the Doctrine of Natural Law. Vanderbilt Law Review 14: 23–64. ———. 1960a. Plato and the Doctrine of Natural Law. Vanderbilt Law Review 14: 23–64.
Zurück zum Zitat ———. 1960b. Das Problem der Gerechtigkeit. In Reine Rechtslehre, 355–444. Vienna: Franz Deuticke Verlag. ———. 1960b. Das Problem der Gerechtigkeit. In Reine Rechtslehre, 355–444. Vienna: Franz Deuticke Verlag.
Zurück zum Zitat ———. 1973. Foundation of the Natural Law Doctrine (1963). Trans. C.G. Mayer. Anglo- American Law Review 2: 83–111. ———. 1973. Foundation of the Natural Law Doctrine (1963). Trans. C.G. Mayer. Anglo- American Law Review 2: 83–111.
Zurück zum Zitat ———. 1991. General Theory of Norms (1979). Trans. M. Hartney. Oxford: Clarendon Press. ———. 1991. General Theory of Norms (1979). Trans. M. Hartney. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Zurück zum Zitat ———. 1992. Introduction to the Problems of Legal Theory (1934). Trans. B. Litschewski Paulson and S.L. Paulson. Oxford: Clarendon Press. ———. 1992. Introduction to the Problems of Legal Theory (1934). Trans. B. Litschewski Paulson and S.L. Paulson. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Zurück zum Zitat ———. 1998. ‘Foreword’ to the Second Printing of Main Problems in the Theory of Public Law (1923) (Trans. Litschewski Paulson, B. and Paulson, S.L.). In Normativity and Norms. Critical Perspectives on Kelsenian Themes, edited by Stanley L. Paulson and Bonnie Litschewski Paulson, 3–22. Oxford: Clarendon Press. ———. 1998. ‘Foreword’ to the Second Printing of Main Problems in the Theory of Public Law (1923) (Trans. Litschewski Paulson, B. and Paulson, S.L.). In Normativity and Norms. Critical Perspectives on Kelsenian Themes, edited by Stanley L. Paulson and Bonnie Litschewski Paulson, 3–22. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Zurück zum Zitat ———. 2005. Pure Theory of Law (1960). Trans. M. Knight. Clark: The Lawbook Exchange. ———. 2005. Pure Theory of Law (1960). Trans. M. Knight. Clark: The Lawbook Exchange.
Zurück zum Zitat Murphy, Mark C. 2001. Natural Law and Practical Rationality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Murphy, Mark C. 2001. Natural Law and Practical Rationality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Zurück zum Zitat Pattaro, Enrico. 1974. Die italienische Rechtspositivismus von der Wiedergeburt zur Krise. Rechtstheorie 5: 67–106. Pattaro, Enrico. 1974. Die italienische Rechtspositivismus von der Wiedergeburt zur Krise. Rechtstheorie 5: 67–106.
Zurück zum Zitat Paulson, Stanley L. 1992a. Kelsen’s Legal Theory: The Final Round. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 12 (2): 265–274.CrossRef Paulson, Stanley L. 1992a. Kelsen’s Legal Theory: The Final Round. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 12 (2): 265–274.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat ———., ed. 1992b. Hans Kelsen und die Rechtssoziologie: Auseinandersetzung mit Hermann U. Kantorowicz, Eugen Ehrlich und Max Weber. Aalen: Scientia Verlag. ———., ed. 1992b. Hans Kelsen und die Rechtssoziologie: Auseinandersetzung mit Hermann U. Kantorowicz, Eugen Ehrlich und Max Weber. Aalen: Scientia Verlag.
Zurück zum Zitat Raz, Joseph. 1998. The Purity of the Pure Theory. In Normativity and Norms. Critical Perspectives on Kelsenian Themes, edited by Stanley L. Paulson and Bonnie Litschewski Paulson, 237–252. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Raz, Joseph. 1998. The Purity of the Pure Theory. In Normativity and Norms. Critical Perspectives on Kelsenian Themes, edited by Stanley L. Paulson and Bonnie Litschewski Paulson, 237–252. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Zurück zum Zitat Rodriguez-Blanco, Veronica. 2014. Law and Authority under the Guise of the Good. Oxford: Hart Publishing. Rodriguez-Blanco, Veronica. 2014. Law and Authority under the Guise of the Good. Oxford: Hart Publishing.
Zurück zum Zitat Rundle, Kristen. 2012. Forms Liberate. Reclaiming the Jurisprudence of Lon L Fuller. Oxford: Hart Publishing. Rundle, Kristen. 2012. Forms Liberate. Reclaiming the Jurisprudence of Lon L Fuller. Oxford: Hart Publishing.
Zurück zum Zitat Sigwart, Christoph. 1904. Logik. 3rd ed. Tübingen: Mohr. Sigwart, Christoph. 1904. Logik. 3rd ed. Tübingen: Mohr.
Zurück zum Zitat Thorton, Mark T. 1982. Aristotelian Practical Reason. Mind 91: 57–76.CrossRef Thorton, Mark T. 1982. Aristotelian Practical Reason. Mind 91: 57–76.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Tur, Richard, and William Twining, eds. 1986. Essays on Kelsen. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Tur, Richard, and William Twining, eds. 1986. Essays on Kelsen. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Zurück zum Zitat Vinx, Lars. 2007. Hans Kelsen’s Pure Theory of Law. Legality and Legitimacy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRef Vinx, Lars. 2007. Hans Kelsen’s Pure Theory of Law. Legality and Legitimacy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Viola, Francesco. 2003. Action, Authority and Authorization: Starting from Hobbes. Hobbes Studies 16: 3–14.CrossRef Viola, Francesco. 2003. Action, Authority and Authorization: Starting from Hobbes. Hobbes Studies 16: 3–14.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Westberg, Daniel. 1994. Right Practical Reason. Aristotle, Action, and Prudence in Aquinas. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Westberg, Daniel. 1994. Right Practical Reason. Aristotle, Action, and Prudence in Aquinas. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Zurück zum Zitat Wiland, Eric. 2002. Theories of Practical Reason. Metaphilosophy 33 (4): 450–467.CrossRef Wiland, Eric. 2002. Theories of Practical Reason. Metaphilosophy 33 (4): 450–467.CrossRef
Metadaten
Titel
Hans Kelsen and Practical Reason
verfasst von
Francesco Viola
Copyright-Jahr
2017
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-51817-6_7

Premium Partner