Archiwum Filozofii Prawa i Filozofii Społecznej

Journal of the Polish Section of IVR (ISSN:2082-3304)

IVRwww.ivr.org.pl

W poszukiwaniu Świętego Graala. Andrzej Grabowski o prawniczym pojęciu obowiązywaniu prawa

Dr Tomasz Pietrzykowski

University of Silesia


Language: Polish

Published: Number 1(1)/2010, s. 64-77.

Download file: Download

Number of downloads: 472

References:

  1. Biccieri C., The Grammar of Society. The Nature and Dynamics of Social Norms, Cambridge 2006.
  2. Brown D., When Strangers Cooperate. Using Social Conventions to Govern Ourselves, New York 1995.
  3. Czepita S., Reguły konstytutywne a zagadnienia prawoznawstwa, Szczecin 1996.
  4. Gilbert M., Living Together. Rationality, Sociality & Obligation, Rowham 1996.
  5. Gilbert M., On Social Facts, Princeton 1989.
  6. Gizbert-Studnicki T., Ujęcie instytucjonalne w teorii prawa, w: Stelmach J. (red.), Studia z filozofii prawa, Kraków 2001.
  7. Grabowski A., Prawnicze pojęcie obowiązywania prawa stanowionego. Krytyka niepozytywistycznej koncepcji prawa, Kraków 2009.
  8. Hoerster N., Was ist Recht?, München 2006.
  9. Lagerspetz E., The Opposite Mirrors. An Essay on the Conventionalist Theory of Institutions, Dordrecht 1995.
  10. Lewis D., Convention. A Philosophical Study, Oxford 1979.
  11. MacCormick N., Institutions of Law, London 2007.
  12. Marmor A., Social Conventions. From Language to Law, Cambridge (Mass. 2009).
  13. Masternak-Kubiak M., Glosa do wyroku TK z 19 grudnia 2002 r. K 33/02 (Kwestia mocy wiążącej tzw. umów zabużańskich), „Państwo i Prawo“ 2003/6.
  14. Neumann U., Problem obowiązywania prawa, „Państwo i Prawo“ 2007/7.
  15. Nowacki J., Tobor Z., Wstęp do prawoznawstwa, Katowice 1996
  16. Pietrzykowski T., Czym jest postpozytywizm prawniczy?, „Radca Prawny“ 2009/12.
  17. Pietrzykowski T., Instytucje prawne jako sprzężenie reguł, dostępny on-line.
  18. Pietrzykowski T., John Searle i ontologia prawa, „Studia Prawnicze” 2009/1–2.
  19. Pietrzykowski T., Obowiązywanie i stosowanie prawa cywilnego w czasie. Problemy intertemporalne, w: Safjan M. (red.), System prawa prywatnego, t. I, Prawo cywilne – część ogólna, Warszawa 2007.
  20. Pietrzykowski T., Powrót platońskiej jaskini, dostępny on-line.
  21. Pietrzykowski T., Temporalny zakres obowiązywania prawa, „Państwo i Prawo“ 2003/4.
  22. Safjan M. (red.), System prawa prywatnego, t. I, Prawo cywilne – część ogólna, Warszawa 2007.
  23. Searle J. , The Construction of Social Reality, Londyn 1995.
  24. Stelmach J. (red.), Studia z filozofii prawa, Kraków 2001.
  25. Wittgenstein L., Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus, Warszawa 1997.

Robert Alexy’s Theory of Legal Principles

Dr Milena Korycka

Nicolaus Copernicus University in Toruń


English abstract: This article concerns Robert Alexy’s conception of legal principles, which conception he builds on the basis of an analysis of constitutional norms. The main assumption of his conception of rights is that in this field it is necessary to use the theory of principles as the basis. He created his own theory of principles as norms which require realization to the greatest extent possible in the light of legal and actual possibilities. Consequently, he defines principles as optimisation commands, capable of different degrees of realization depending on the actual and legal possibilities. The dimension of the legal possibility depends on the contrasting principles and rules. R. Alexy treats rules and principles as reasons of different kinds. While principles are always prima facie reasons, rules are definitive reasons until an exception to them is provided for. R. Alexy claims also that the nature of principles implies the existence of the principle of proportionality in the sense that the principle of proportionality with its three “sub-principles”: adequacy, necessity and proportionality in the strict sense, logically follows from the nature of principles and can be inferred from them

Keywords: Robert Alexy, legal principles, principle of proportionality
(keywords supplied by the editors)

Language: Polish

Published: Number 1(1)/2010, pp. 48-63.

Download file: Download

Number od downloads: 1,493

References:

  1. Alexy R., A Theory of Constitutional Rights, Oxford-New York 2002.
  2. Alexy R., Constitutional Rights, Balancing, and Rationality, „Ratio Juris” 2003/2.
  3. Alexy R., Jürgen Habermas’s Theory of Legal Discourse, ”Cardozo Law Review” 1995–1996/17.
  4. Alexy R., On the Structure of Legal Principles, ”Ratio Juris” 2000/3.
  5. Alexy R., On the Thesis of a Necessary Connection Between Law and Morality: Bulygin’s Critique, „Ratio Juris” 2000/2.
  6. Alexy R., The argument from justice. A reply to legal positivism, Oxford 2002.
  7. Alexy R., The Nature of Legal Philosophy, „Ratio Juris” 2004/2.
  8. Alexy R., W obronie niepozytywistycznej koncepcji prawa, „Państwo i Prawo” 1993/11.
  9. Dworkin R., The Model of Rules, ”The University of Chicago Law Review” 1967-68/35.
  10. Dworkin R., Imperium Prawa, Warszawa 2006.
  11. Gizbert-Studnicki T., Zasady i reguły prawne, „Państwo i Prawo” 1988/3.
  12. Habermas J., Between facts and norms, Cambridge 1996.
  13. Hart H.L.A., Pojęcie prawa, Warszawa 1998.
  14. Klatt M., Taking rights less seriously. A structural analysis of judicial discretion, „Ratio Juris” 2007/2.
  15. Korycka M., Zasada proporcjonalności – refleksje na gruncie aksjologicznych podstaw konstytucji z 1997 roku i orzecznictwa Trybunału Konstytucyjnego, w: Morawski L. (red.), Wykładnia prawa i inne problemy filozofii prawa, Toruń 2005.
  16. Korycka M., Zasady prawa, „Jurysta” 2007/8.
  17. Morawski L. (red.), Wykładnia prawa i inne problemy filozofii prawa, Toruń 2005.
  18. Płeszka K., Reguły preferencji w prawniczych rozumowaniach interpretacyjnych, w: Stelmach J. (red.), Studia z filozofii prawa, Kraków 2003.
  19. Raz J., Autorytet prawa, Warszawa 2000.
  20. Stelmach J. (red.), Studia z filozofii prawa, Kraków 2003.
  21. Stelmach J., Sarkowicz R., Filozofia prawa XIX I XX w., Kraków 1998.
  22. Tuleja P., Normatywna treść praw jednostki w ustawach konstytucyjnych RP, Warszawa 1997.

“The Semantic Sting” Argument and Jerzy Wróblewski’s Theory of Law

Mgr Adam Dyrda

Jagiellonian University


English abstract: Ronald Dworkin once criticized legal positivists for that their theories are founded on a mistake called “the semantic sting”, which claims that legal philosophy, as a silent prologue to every decision of law, cannot be only a semantic account to the word ‘law’. The article presents Dworkinean argument (and its most influential critique of Herbert Hart) and examines whether Jerzy Wróblewski’s legal theory (in its descriptive layer similar to the theory of Herbert Hart) is susceptible to “the semantic sting”. Finally, the answer given is based on a particular solution: Jerzy Wróblewski’s concept of rationality of legal decision appliance. The answer is in accoradance with argumentation of soft positivists, such as Herbert Hart or Jules Coleman, and is based on the acceptance that, even if Dworkin’s argument is meaningfull, it still does not apply to the theories presented by the soft positivists. The controversy whether a particular theory is “semantically stung” is de facto a dispute over a proper methodological approach to legal theory and a relation in which such a theory remains to interpretative jurisprudence of Ronald Dworkin. In this case we can treat Jerzy Wróblewski’s theory as a metatheory, which deals with theoretic disagreement over the grounds of the law, while deciding the case.

Keywords: Ronald Dworkin, Herbert Hart, Jerzy Wróblewski, semantic sting, legal positivism, rational application of law

Language: Polish

Published: Number 1(1)/2010, pp. 39-47.

Download file: Download

Number of downloads: 676

References:

  1. Coleman J. (red.), Hart’s Postscript: Essays on the Postscript to the Concept of Law, Oxford 2001.
  2. Coleman J., Methodology, w: Coleman J., Shapiro S. (red.), The Oxford Handbook of Jurisprudence and Philosophy of Law, Oxford 2002.
  3. Coleman J., The Practice of Principle: In Defence of a Pragmatist Approach to Legal Theory, Oxford 2001.
  4. Coleman J., Shapiro S. (red.), The Oxford Handbook of Jurisprudence and Philosophy of Law, Oxford 2002.
  5. Davidson D., Preface, w: LePore E., McLaughlin B.P., Actions and Events. Perspectives on the Philosophy of Donald Davidson, Oxford 1985.
  6. Dworkin R., Imperium prawa, Warszawa 2006.
  7. Gizbert-Studnicki T., Zasady i reguły prawne, „Państwo i Prawo” 1988/3.
  8. Hart H.L.A., Definition and Theory in Jurisprudence, Oxford 1953.
  9. Hart H.L.A., Pojęcie prawa, Warszawa 1998.
  10. LePore E., McLaughlin B.P., Actions and Events. Perspectives on the Philosophy of Donald Davidson, Oxford 1985.
  11. MacCormick N., Legal Reasoning and Legal Theory, Oxford 1978.
  12. Raz J., Two Views of the Nature of the Theory of Law: A Partial Comparison, w: Coleman J. (red.), Hart’s Postscript: Essays on the Postscript to the Concept of Law, Oxford 2001.
  13. Shapiro S., What is Law? (And Why Should We Care?), 1st Conference On Philosophy And Law Neutrality And Theory Of Law, Girona, 20-22.05.2010
  14. Wróblewski J., Ronald Dworkin Law’s Empire, „Państwo i Prawo” 1988/3.
  15. Wróblewski J., Rozumienie prawa i jego wykładnia, Wrocław 1990.
  16. Wróblewski J., Sądowe stosowanie prawa, Warszawa 1972.
  17. Wróblewski J., Zagadnienia teorii wykładni prawa ludowego, Warszawa 1959.
  18. Zabala S., The hermeneutic nature of analytic philosophy: a study of Ernst Tugendhat, New York 2008.
  19. Zirk-Sadowski M., Wprowadzenie, w: Dworkin R., Imperium prawa, Warszawa 2006.

Coherence Model of Legal Reasoning

Dr Michał Araszkiewicz

Jagiellonian University


English abstract: The aim of the article is to present a model of legal reasoning based of the concept of coherence, as this concept is understood in recent developments of cognitive science. More precisely, the model, hereafter referred to as CMLR (Coherence Model of Legal Reasoning) is based on the constraint satisfaction theory of coherence, elaborated and defended by Paul Thagard. The claim of the author is that CMLR appears very satisfactory when assessed against criteria typically employed for evaluation of legal-theoretical models of argumentation. It is able to represent legal reasoning either as a neural network or, more traditionally, as a formal dialogue game. In consequence, CMLR offers a plausible “third road” between traditional deductive and non-deductive models of legal thinking.

Keywords: legal argumentation, legal reasoning, coherence, cohesion

Language: Polish

Published: Number 1(1)/2010, pp. 19-38.

Download file: Download

Number of downloads: 519

References:

  1. Ajdukiewicz K., Zagadnienia i kierunki filozofii, Kęty–Warszawa 2003.
  2. Alexy R., A Theory of Legal Argumentation. The Theory of Rational Discourse as Theory of Legal Justification, Oxford 1989.
  3. Alexy R., On Balancing and Subsumption. A Structural Comparison, „Ratio Juris“ 2003/4.
  4. Alexy R., A Theory of Constitutional Rights, Oxford 2002.
  5. Alexy R., The Weight Formula, w: J. Stelmach, B. Brożek, W. Załuski (red.), Studies in the Philosophy of Law 3, Kraków 2007.
  6. Amayi A., Formal models of coherence and legal epistemology, „Artificial Intelligence and Law” 2007/15.
  7. Bechtela W., Abrahamsen A., Connectionism and the Mind. An Introduction to Paralell Processing in Networks, Cambridge 1991.
  8. Bench-Capon T., Dunne P.E., Argumentation in artificial intelligence, „Artificial Intelligence” 2007/171.
  9. BonJour L., The Structure of Empirical Knowledge, Cambridge (Mass.)-London 1985.
  10. Brożek B., Defeasibility of Legal Reasoning, Kraków 2004.
  11. Brożek B., Kilka uwag o logice norm, w: J. Stelmach (red.), Studia z filozofii prawa, Kraków 2001.
  12. Brożek B., Rationality and Discourse. Towards a Normative Model of Applying Law, Warszawa 2007.
  13. Daniels N., Justice and Justification. Reflective Equilibrium in Theory and Practice, Cambridge 1996.
  14. Dworkin R., The Model of Rules, “University of Chicago Law Review” 1965/35.
  15. Gizbert-Studnicki T., Zasady i reguły prawne, “Państwo i Prawo” 1988/3.
  16. Grabowski A., Judicial Argumentation and Pragmatics. A Study on the Extension of the Theory of Legal Argumentation, Kraków 1999.
  17. Hage J., Reasoning with rules, Dordrecht 1997.
  18. Holyoak K., Thagard P., Mental Leaps. Analogy in Creative Thought, Cambridge-London 1995.
  19. Jørgensen J., Imperatives and Logic, „Erkenntnis“ 1937–1938/7.
  20. MacCormick N., Summers R., Interpreting Statutes. A comparative study, Dartmouth 1991.
  21. MacCormick N., Legal Reasoning and Legal Theory, Oxford 1978.
  22. Lehrer K., Theory of Knowledge, London 1990.
  23. Malinowski A., Nowak L., Problemy modelowania w teorii prawa, „Państwo i Prawo” 1972/2.
  24. Marciszewski W. (red.), Mała encyklopedia logiki, Wrocław–Warszawa–Kraków 1970.
  25. Płeszka K., Uzasadnianie decyzji interpretacyjnych przez ich konsekwencje, Kraków 1996.
  26. Prakken H., Logical Tools for Modelling Legal Argument. Study of Defeasible Reasoning in Law, Dordrecht 1997.
  27. Prakken H., Sartor G., A Dialectical Model of Assessing Conficting Arguments in Legal Reasoning, „Artificial Intelligence and Law” 1996/4.
  28. Putnam H., Reason, truth and history, Cambridge 1981.
  29. Rescher N., Dialectics. A Controversy-Oriented Approach to the Theory of Knowledge, Albany 1977.
  30. Rescher N., The Coherence Theory of Truth, Oxford 1973.
  31. Stelmach J., Naturalistyczny i antynaturalistyczny model teorii prawa, “Studia Prawnicze” 1984/3–4.
  32. Stelmach J., Brożek B., Metody prawnicze, Kraków 2006.
  33. Tarski A., O pojęciu wynikania logicznego, „Przegląd Filozoficzny” 1936/39.
  34. Thagard P., Ethical Coherence, „Philosophical Psychology“ 1998/4.
  35. Thagard P., Coherence in Thought and Action, Cambridge-London 2000.
  36. Thagard P., Explanatory Coherence, „Behavioral and Brain Sciences” 1989/12.
  37. Thagard P., Mind. An Introduction to Cognitive Science, Cambridge-London 2005.
  38. Thagard P., Verbeurgt K., Coherence as constraint satisfaction, „Cognitive Science“ 1998/22.
  39. Volpe G., A Minimalist Solution to Jørgensen’s Dillemma, „Ratio Juris” 1999/12.
  40. Woleński J., Epistemologia. Poznanie, prawda, wiedza, realizm, Warszawa 2005.
  41. Woleński J., Z zagadnień analitycznej filozofii prawa, „Zeszyty Naukowe Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego. Prace prawnicze” 92.
  42. Wróblewski J., Sądowe stosowanie prawa, Warszawa 1988.

 

 

The influence of the conscience clause and cultural defense on the appraisal of the structure of crime

Prof. UŚ dr hab. Olga Sitarz, Dr Dominika Bek, Mgr Jakub Hanc

University of Silesia

English abstract: The submitted study is devoted to the clause of conscience and cultural defense. The initial arguments are focused on explaining the indicated terms, by referring to current doctrinal positions. The basic course of considerations – devoted to primary and secondary legality, legislative and non-legislative lawful excuses, circumstances reducing or excluding guilt – is an attempt to answer the question of where in the structure of crime is a place for conscience clause and cultural defense.

Keywords: conscience clause, cultural defense, crime, legislative lawful excuse (justification), non-legislative lawful excuse, circumstances excluding guilt

Language: Polish

Received: 28.03.2017
Accepted: Załączniki07.08.2017

Published: Number 2(15)/2017, pp. 60-79.

Download file: Download

Number of downloads: 543

Critical analysis of a judicial discourse on the legal situation of homosexuals in the light of Article 18 of the Constitution of the Republic of Poland

Mgr Wojciech Zomerski

University of Wroclaw

English abstract: In this paper, I make an attempt to conduct a critical analysis of judicial discourse devoted to the situation of homosexual persons in the light of Article 18 of the Constitution of the Republic of Poland. In order to show how unequal treatment of homosexuals is being reproduced, I analyze selected rulings of the Polish Constitutional Tribunal, Supreme Court and administrative courts. On the methodological level I refer to the Critical Discourse Analysis. In the result, the analysis of chosen rulings is conducted in the attempt to spot linguistic maneuvers leading to the reproduction of unequal treatment of homosexuals. Thus, in the course of this analysis I apply such notions as interpellation (Althusser), ideology (Žižek), doxa and habitus (Bourdieu). On the whole, I argue that the flawed interpretation of Article 18 is the result of referring to established judicial standpoint, illegitimate departures from linguistic interpretation, or many kinds of concealment and counterfactual premises. The origins of doxa that is the basis of such practice, might be seen in the Catholic doctrine which is based on the assumption of unnatural character of homosexuality and subordination of human sexuality to aims of procreation. In the end, I come to the conclusion that unmasking of axiological presuppositions underlying interpretation of the analyzed provision would fundamentally change the character of discussion devoted to the legal situation of homosexuals, satisfying Habermasian standards of deliberative democracy, and it might eventually lead to recognition of one-sex relations by legislator.

Keywords: homosexuality, article 18 of the Constitution, Critical Discourse Analysis, discrimination, ideology, doxa, interpellation

Language: Polish

Received: 13.03.2017
Accepted: 03.05.2017

Published: Number 2(15)/2017, pp. 80-97.

Download file: Download

Number of downloads: 533

Communicative rationality as the basis for the legitimacy of good governance

Mgr Mariola Żak

University of Warsaw

English abstract: The main aim of this paper is to demonstrate that the concept of good governance, based on the theoretical description and methodology of the sciences of organization, public management and economy, auxiliary extending to other reconstructive sciences (political science, sociology, psychology), has the cognitive dimension, referring to the practical reasoning of individuals. Through subjection of specific strategies to the communicative rationality, depending on the normative context, the different ways of public sector management may be selected by the public agencies to a specific area of social relations. This choice is made based on the rational consensus, concluded between the stakeholders and the so-called depositary of the law, by which is meant the professionals associated with the performance of the public service: the politicians, the lawyers and the law-applying officials. The article shows the application of the theory of the communicative ethics: the universal pragmatics of J. Habermas and the transcendental pragmatics of K.-O. Apel in order to explain and justify good governance model.

Keywords: good governance, networks, legitimacy, instrumental rationality, communicative rationality, universal pragmatics, transcendental pragmatics

Language: Polish

Received: 25.09.2016
Accepted: Załączniki02.03.2017

Published: Number 2(15)/2017, pp. 98-114.

Download file: Download
Number of downloads: 485

The ius et lex distinction in the contemporary legal science

Dr Maciej Pichlak

University of Wroclaw

English abstract: The aim of the paper is to clarify the concepts of ius and lex, as well as to indicate main interpretations of these concepts in the contemporary jurisprudence. For the concepts of ius and lex are not only of historical significance (as used in the legal discourse of the ancient Rome), but they are present in the entire history of the Western legal culture – since ancient times until today. Owing to this rich historical heritage, as well as to the very nature of the discussed concepts, it is impossible to offer classical definitions of ius and/or lex. Therefore, a proper analysis of their meaning will lead to determination of their ‘connotative field’: a map of associations and theories related to these concepts.

In order to realize this task, the paper offers three basic typologies that allow to order mutual relations between existing theoretical standpoints in this field. The first typology concerns a practical function of ius in the legal order. We can distinguish here theories which perceive such a function as mainly negative, positive, or mediating (optimalising). The second typology treats on the sources of binding force of ius. One can indicate positivistic, legalnaturalistic and hermeneutic intepretation of this problem. Finally, the third typology regards mutual relations between ius and lex, which may be described either as hierarchical, or as functionally differentiated. These considerations allow to conclude that the usefulness of such a dualistic way of thinking about the law is ever persisting. Within this perspective the legal order is conceived as containing statutory law (lex) as well as nonwritten binding standards, independent from law–making authorities (ius).

Keywrods: ius et lex, legal culture, law beyond statutory law, dualism of law

Language: Polish

Received: 09.03.2017
Accepted: Załączniki03.05.2017

Published: Number 2(15)/2017, pp. 49-59.

Download file: Download
Number of downloads: 1,030

The limits of religious argumentation in the public sphere. Between participation and coercion

Dr Łukasz Mirocha

Nicolaus Copernicus University in Toruń

English abstract: The article is devoted to the question of the presence of religious argumentation in the public sphere. The crucial problem is whether the religious argument should be completely accepted in the public discussion as sufficient basis for e.g. law-making or not, and – if so – what are necessary conditions of the presence of such factor. The author writes about course and results of the debate on pointed issue which has started in The United States in the late 80s of XX century. He also wonders why issues which are rather obvious for the great majority of other liberal and democratic countries involves such emotional discussions in American humanities. One of the author’s observations is that historical examples neither with the positive or negative influence of religion on social life are too weak ground for building any position to the considered problem. In the last part of the article, the philosophical conclusions are compared with the case law of the European Court of Human Rights in regards to the freedom of religion.

Keywords: religious argumentation, public sphere, religious freedom, state neutrality, Robert Audi, civic participation

Language: Polish

Received: 05.10.2016
Accepted: 18.02.2017

Published: Number 2(15)/2017, pp. 38-48.

Download file: Download
Number od downloads: 504

Journal infrastructureISSN 2082-3304Open accessCC BY 4.0Crossref DOIDOAJ