Sanction and Obligation

The Monist 68 (3):403-418 (1985)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

H. L. A. Hart’s criticism of Austin’s theory of law is that it is essentially false to the facts. Austin asserts that “Every positive law simply and strictly so called, is set by a sovereign person, or sovereign body of persons, to a … person or persons in a state of subjection to its author.” Laws get their force from the threat of sanction. This view, which we may call “the gunman theory of law,” is what Hart criticizes. Too many laws, he argues, do not look like commands backed by sanctions for us to find this theory compelling.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 93,867

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

Austin, Kelsen, and the Model of Sovereignty.Lars Vinx - 2011 - Canadian Journal of Law and Jurisprudence 24 (2):473-490.
Austin and the Electors.Pavlos Eleftheriadis - 2011 - Canadian Journal of Law and Jurisprudence 24 (2):441-453.
The Hierarchical Model and H. L. A. Hart’s Concept of Law.Massimo La Torre - 2007 - Archiv für Rechts- und Sozialphilosophie 93 (1):82-100.
Introduction.[author unknown] - 1996 - In Dennis M. Patterson (ed.), A Companion to Philosophy of Law and Legal Theory. Blackwell. pp. 1-5.
The Hierarchical Model and H. L. A. Hart’s Concept of Law.Massimo La Torre - 2007 - Archiv für Rechts- und Sozialphilosophie 93 (1):82-100.
Hart, Dworkin, Judges, and New Law.Robert J. Yanal - 1985 - The Monist 68 (3):388-402.

Analytics

Added to PP
2012-03-18

Downloads
74 (#217,732)

6 months
4 (#1,004,663)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

Russell's power.Russell Hardin - 1996 - Philosophy of the Social Sciences 26 (3):322-347.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references