nach oben

Erschienen in:

2017 | OriginalPaper | Buchkapitel

15. Kelsen and Natural Law Theory: An Enduring Critical Affair

verfasst von : Pierluigi Chiassoni

Erschienen in: Kelsenian Legal Science and the Nature of Law

Verlag: Springer International Publishing

Einloggen

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

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

In a series of essays published from the late 1920s up to the mid-1960s, Hans Kelsen carries out a radical critique of natural law theory. The present paper purports to provide an analytical reconstruction and a critical assessment of such critique. It contains two parts. Part one surveys the fundamentals of Kelsen’s argumentative strategy against natural law and its theorists. Part two considers, in turn, two critical reactions to Kelsen’s criticisms: by Edgar Bodenheimer, on behalf of traditional natural law theory; by Robert P. George, on behalf of “the new natural law theory”. As the analysis suggests, Kelsen’s critique stands up to such criticisms.

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!

Jetzt informieren

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!

Jetzt informieren

Vorheriges Kapitel Kelsen on Natural Law and Legal Science

Nächstes Kapitel Conclusion: Positive Law and the Kelsenian Project

As we shall see, at Sect. 15.2.2, Kelsen considers the theories of natural law asserting dynamic, “purely delegating”, natural law basic norms as “inconsistent” with the “pure idea of natural law”.

It should be emphasized that Kelsen’s reconstruction of the “pure idea” of a natural legal order, far from being odd or idiosyncratic, seems in conformity with different reconstructions, even by authors sympathetic to natural law thinking. For instance, Mark Murphy identifies three basic features of “the paradigmatic natural law view”: (1) objectivity (“the natural law is given by God”); (2) absolute validity (“it is naturally authoritative over all human beings”); (3) liability to knowledge (“it is naturally knowable by all human beings”) (See Murphy 2011, § 1.4).

All the labels (like “genealogical argument”, etc.), here and in the following, are the outcome of my own reconstruction of Kelsen’s critique.

As it is well known, a similar argument, “the argument from queerness”, has been deployed against moral objectivism in general, by Mackie (1977, 38–42).

Kelsen appears perfectly aware of the persuasive “gap” contained within his arguments. Critical empiricism can bring the ultimate practical motives of humans’ belief in ontological dualism to the fore. It can also advocate “the modern mind” of moral autonomy and ultimate personal responsibility in practical matters, against the “primitive mind”. But, since it tacitly rejects so-called “reason’s optimism” as unsound, it must stay content with that and hope for mature and honest thinking to prevail among humans, sooner or later.

See above, at Sect. 15.2.1.1.

See above, Sect. 15.2.1.2; see also Kelsen 1949, 138: “examining nature amounts to exploring God’s will”.

This point is conceded, apparently, by Murphy 2011.

Kelsen 1960b, 113–114, quoting Aquinas on men “quidam protervi, et ad vitia proni, qui verbis de facile moveri non possunt […] quidam male dispositi non ducuntur ad virtutem, nisi cogantur”.

See e.g. Kelsen 1960b, §50, where, following Troeltsch, he accords the central position to the Stoics’ and the Christian Church’s transformation of positive law, whatever its content, into an imperfect form of natural law.

See, also, Ibid., 338, 339 in regard to Grotius, Hobbes and Pufendorf.

See Sect. 15.2.1.2 above.

See above, at Sect. 15.2.3.

See above, at Sect. 15.2.2.

See above, at Sect. 15.2.

See above, at Sects. 15.2.2 and 15.2.3.

The passages he quotes from Aquinas, concerning the imperative nature of practical reason - in particular, the line “ratio imperat de his quae sunt ad finem” – may also be read to mean that reason “teaches” which courses of actions are instrumentally necessary to attain a goal that the will has previously selected. See Kelsen 1960b, 88 ff. text and fn 4. It must be observed, however, that George appears to adopt precisely such a hybrid, Aquinian conception of practical reason that is the object of the Kelsenian critique.

Kelsen would be delighted, by the way, in seeing that different “new natural lawyers” identify different catalogues of the basic natural goods, and may also “derive” different rules out of them, by exercising their practical reasonableness,. See, on this point, the clear account provided by Murphy 2011.

Bix, Brian H. 2002. Natural law: The Modern Tradition. In The Oxford Handbook of Jurisprudence and Philosophy of Law, edited by Jules L. Coleman, Kenneth E. Himma, and Scott Shapiro, 61–103. Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press.

Bodenheimer, Edgar. 1950. The Natural-Law Doctrine Before the Tribunal of Science: A Reply to Hans Kelsen. The Western Political Quarterly 3: 335–363.CrossRef

Finnis, John. 2011. Natural Law and Natural Rights. 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

George, Robert P. 1999. In Defense of Natural Law. Oxford: Clarendon Press.CrossRef

———. 2000. Kelsen and Aquinas on “The Natural Law Doctrine”. Notre Dame Law Review 75: 1625–1646.

Grisez, Germain, Joseph Boyle, and John Finnis. 1987. Practical Principles, Moral Truth, and Ultimate Ends. American Journal of Jurisprudence 32: 99–151.CrossRef

Hart, Herbert L.A. 1961. The Concept of Law. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Kelsen, Hans. 1928a. Die Idee des Naturrechtes. English translation, The Idea of Natural Law. In Hans Kelsen. 1973. Essays in Legal and Moral Philosophy. Selected and introduced by Ota Weinberger, 27–60. Dordrecht-Holland/Boston: Reidel.

———. 1928b. Die philosophischen Grundlagen der Naturrechtslehre und des Rechtspositivismus. English translation, Natural Law Doctrine and Legal Positivism. In Hans Kelsen. 1945. General Theory of Law and State, 391–446. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

———. 1934. Reine Rechtlehre. Einleitung in die rechtswissenschaftliche Problematik. Wien: Deuticke.

———. 1945. General Theory of Law and State. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

———. 1949. The Natural-Law Doctrine before the Tribunal of Science. In Hans Kelsen. 1957. What Is Justice? Justice, Law, and Politics in the Mirror of Science, 137–173, 384–388. Berkeley/Los Angeles/London: University of California Press.

———. 1952. What is Justice? In Hans Kelsen. 1957. What Is Justice? Justice, Law, and Politics in the Mirror of Science, 1–24. Berkeley/Los Angeles/London: University of California Press.

———. 1953. Was ist Gerechtigkeit? English translation, What Is Justice? In Hans Kelsen. 1957. What Is Justice? Justice, Law, and Politics in the Mirror of Science, 1–24. Berkeley/Los Angeles/London: University of California Press.

———. 1957. What Is Justice? Justice, Law, and Politics in the Mirror of Science. Berkeley/Los Angeles/London: University of California Press.

———. 1959. Justice et droit naturel. In Annales de Philosophie Politique 3: Le droit naturel, 1–123. Institut International de Philosophie Politique. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.

———. 1960a. Reine Rechtslehre. Wien: Deuticke.

———. 1960b. Das Problem der Gerechtigkeit. Italian translation, 1975. Il problema della giustizia. Torino: Einaudi.

———. 1961. Naturrechtslehre und Rechtspositivismus. Spanish translation, La doctrina del derecho natural y el positivismo juridico. In Hans Kelsen. 1969. Contribuciones a la teoria pura del derecho, 119–137. México: Fontamara.

———. 1964. Die Grundlagen der Naturrechtslehre. English translation, The Foundation of the Theory of Natural Law. In Hans Kelsen. 1973. Essays in Legal and Moral Philosophy. Selected and introduced by Ota Weinberger, 114–153. Dordrecht-Holland/Boston: Reidel.

———. 1969. Contribuciones a la teoria pura del derecho. Fontamara: México.

———. 1973. Essays in Legal and Moral Philosophy, Selected and introduced by Ota Weinberger. Dordrecht/Boston: Reidel.

———. 1979. Allgemeine Theorie der Normen. Wien: Manz.

Mackie, John L. 1977. Ethics: Inventing Right and Wrong. Harmondsworth: Penguin.

Murphy, Mark. 2011. The Natural Law Tradition in Ethics. In Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. September 23, 2002; substantive revision September 27, 2011. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/natural-law-ethics/.

Titel: Kelsen and Natural Law Theory: An Enduring Critical Affair
verfasst von: Pierluigi Chiassoni
Verlag: Springer International Publishing
Buch: Kelsenian Legal Science and the Nature of Law
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-51816-9

Electronic ISBN: 978-3-319-51817-6

Copyright-Jahr: 2017
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-51817-6_15

Springer Professional

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.

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

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Premium Partner