In modern times the idea of the objectivity of law has been undermined by skepticism about legal institutions, disbelief in ideals of unbiased evaluation, and a conviction that language is indeterminate. Greenawalt here considers the validity of such skepticism, examining such questions as: whether the law as it exists provides determinate answers to legal problems; whether the law should treat people in an "objective way," according to abstract rules, general categories, and external consequences; and how far the law is anchored (...) in something external to itself, such as social morality, political justice, or economic efficiency. In the process he illuminates the development of jurisprudence in the English-speaking world over the last fifty years, assessing the contributions of many important movements. (shrink)

On August 8, 2003, the Boston Globe reported that the German publisher of After the Terror had “halted printing…because of recent statements by the…author supporting Palestinian violence.” The charge appears to be true. On p. 151 Honderich writes: “Palestinians have exercised a moral right in their terrorism against the Israelis.” Even if he is correct in this assessment, he devoted only half a page to explaining a judgment that has provoked volumes from others. If anything in this book can be (...) said to be provocative verging on the irresponsible, I think it is this judgment. (shrink)

Rakowski's form of egalitarianism places him squarely within the dominant individualistic liberal tradition developed over the past two or three decades by John Rawls, Ronald Dworkin, and others. He calls his view "equality of fortune," and states its "central thesis" this way: "no one should have less valuable resources and opportunities available to him than anyone else, simply in virtue of some chance occurrence the risk of which he did not choose to incur". Those who suffer from the fallout of (...) the natural lottery have "a right to compensation" from "fortune's favorites". Thus, his answer to the question Amartya Sen has popularized --"Equality of what?"--is not, contrary to appearances, equality of fortune. Rather, it is equality of "resources and opportunities," which alone can rectify the inevitable inequalities of fortune. (shrink)