Abstract
In this chapter, I examine Kelsen’s
contention that the natural law doctrine
necessarily depends on the existence of
God or other supreme creator. I argue that
this contention is based on a number of
interrelated claims: that the natural law
doctrine attempts to provide a definitive
standard of justice; that such a definitive
account may only be posited by a
superhuman creator; that natural law
seeks to derive principles of justice from
the nature of reality; and that natural law
norms may only be derived from a general
norm posited by God, moreover, if natural
lawyers deny the claim that the principles
of natural law may only be derived from
God, they must necessarily be attempting
to derive an ought from an is. Throughout
the chapter, I challenge Kelsen’s claims by
considering natural law theories which do
not conform to them. I consequently argue
that Kelsen’s conception of natural law is a
caricature which does not correspond to,
or accurately reflect, the rich and varied
tradition of natural law thought.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Title of host publication | Kelsenian Legal Science and the Nature of Law |
Editors | Peter Langford, Ian Bryan, John Mcgarry |
Publisher | Springer |
Pages | 241-255 |
ISBN (Print) | 978-3-319-51816-9 |
Publication status | Published - 18 May 2017 |
Keywords
- Kelsen
- Natural Law
- Law and Philosophy