Grounds of law and legal theory: A response: John Finnis

Legal Theory 13 (3-4):315-344 (2007)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Linking theses of Plato, Wittgenstein, and Weber, section I argues that identification of central cases and settling of focal meanings depend upon the theorist's purpose and, in the case of theory about human affairs—theory adequately attentive to the four irreducible orders in which human persons live and act—upon the purposes for which we intelligibly and intelligently act. Among these purposes, primacy is to be accorded to purposes which are, as best the theorist can judge, reasonable and fit to be adopted by anyone, the theorist included. Section II defends the reasonableness of practical and moral judgments, against Michael Perry's ultimately nihilist claims that egoism's challenge to moral normativity has gone unanswered and that “reason for A” does not entail “reason for” anyone else. Section III takes up Steven Smith's suggestion that such subjectivism is encouraged by the talk in Natural Law and Natural Rights of “pursuing goods,” talk which is individualistic and neglectful of persons, inimical to an understanding of friendship, and impotent in the face of egoism. Here as elsewhere the key is to grasp that understanding any basic or intrinsic human good is to understand it as good for anyone like me and thus—since as I instantiate and embody a universal, viz. human being—as a good common to anyone and everyone. Section IV argues that common good gives reason for exercise and acceptance of authority, and for allegiance, even in time of breakdown. Section V argues that natural law theory is no more dependent on affirming God's existence than any other theory is, in any of the four orders of theory, but equally that is not safe for atheists. For, like any other sound theory, it suggests and is consistent with questions and answers about its grounds, in this case about the source of its normativity and of the human nature that its normative universals presuppose and affirm; and the answers are those argued for, too abstemiously, in the last chapter of NLNR and, more adequately, in the equivalent chapter of Aquinas.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,202

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Persons pursuing goods: Steven D. Smith.Steven D. Smith - 2007 - Legal Theory 13 (3-4):285-313.
The Planning Theory and Natural Law.George Duke - 2015 - Law and Philosophy 34 (2):173-200.
Finnis on nature, reason, God.Mark C. Murphy - 2007 - Legal Theory 13 (3-4):187-209.
A Natural Law Perspective on the Legal Positivist Theory of Legal Obligation.John Brendan Killoran - 1987 - Dissertation, The University of Western Ontario (Canada)
FINNIS ON NATURE, REASON, GOD: Mark C. Murphy.Mark C. Murphy - 2007 - Legal Theory 13 (3-4):187-209.
Central and Peripheral Cases and the Moral Point of View in John Finnis´ Theory of Law.Mayda Hočevar - 2008 - Proceedings of the Xxii World Congress of Philosophy 40:47-52.

Analytics

Added to PP
2014-01-20

Downloads
49 (#309,238)

6 months
4 (#678,769)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

John Finnis
Oxford University

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references