The Obligation to Obey the Law
Dissertation, Washington University (
1989)
Copy
BIBTEX
Abstract
The question of whether one has an obligation to obey the law may mean: Does one have a legal obligation to obey the law? Or: Does one have a general moral obligation to obey any and all laws? Or: Does one have specific moral obligations to obey certain laws? ;I argue that and are to be answered negatively. Here I am concerned to expose as mistaken the belief in the existence of non-moral legal obligation to obey the law. And I offer an affirmative answer to . I reject all content-independent accounts of the obligation to obey laws. Whether or not a moral obligation exists to obey a law would depend, I argue, on the moral content of the individual legal provision. ;In partial defense of my negative thesis respecting questions and , I examine and reject various views on legal obligation in the jurisprudential tradition, including the Thomistic and Austinian theories. ;Turning in chapters three and four to modern theories, I discuss H. L. A. Hart's normative positivism vis-a-vis legal obligation. I then go on to consider the views of some contemporary theorists inspired by Hart, including Ronald Dworkin, Joseph Raz, Roscoe Hill, and Philip Soper. ;In the final chapter I consider a number of different issues, offering, first, a positive argument for the rejection of the idea of non-moral legal obligation; second, an examination anew of the question of the moral obligation to obey the law; third, an exploration of some implications of my aforementioned negative thesis for certain recent controversies in legal philosophy