Abstract.The author gives a short survey of the different methods which have been proposed to deal with the logic of norm sentences on the basis of logical systems of descriptive language: deontic logic, logic of norms as an isomorphism of propositional logic, restriction of logical relations to the propositional content of norm sentences, transformation of norms into sanction sentences, preference interpretation of norm sentences, double interpretation of ought‐sentences and the use of the descriptive interpretation as a tool for establishing the (...) logic of norms, proposition about norms in the place of normative logic, the logic of admissible worlds, postulates addressed to the rational lawgiver and technical ought as a substitute for nor‐mological considerations. A critical analysis of these attempts may prove them inappropriate, but it is not sufficient to prove the impossibility of any method of founding normative logic on systems of a descriptive language. Therefore the author adds a general consideration on the chances of such approaches. (shrink)

The author distinguishes two concepts of practical reason: (a) practical reason as a source of practical principles, and (b) practical reason as the theory of thought operations connected with action. He proves that there is no practical recognition in the sense (a). We can deal with actions only on the basis of dichotomic semantics. Critical analyses of some theories of practical reason are presented (Kant, Lorenzen, Apel, Alexy). The critical part of the paper mainly concerns the discourse theory and its (...) implications for practical philosophy and jurisprudence. (shrink)

Übereinstimmend mit Körner versteht der Autor unter 'praktischer Philosophie' die Gesamtheit der handlungsbezogenen Disziplinen. 'Handlung' ist informationsgelenktes Verhalten eines Subjektes. Der Handlungsbegriff wird durch den handlungsbestimmenden Informationsverarbeitungsprozeß charakterisiert. Handlungstheoretische Analysen erfordern eine erkenntnismäßig differenzierte Semantik. Der Begriff der Handlung setzt die Existenz von Handlungsspielräumen voraus. Der Autor kritisiert die Unterscheidung von kognitivem und präskriptivem Sollen und zeigt, daß Normsätze einer gegebenen Bedeutung in verschiedenen pragmatischen Funktionen verwendet werden können. Es werden die Begriffe 'Normenlogik' und 'deontische Logik' einander gegenübergestellt. Die Standardsysteme (...) der deontischen Logik sind keine geeignete Basis für die normativen Disziplinen. Der Autor fordert die Ausarbeitung einer genuinen Normenlogik, in der Sollsätzen eine primäre und Darfsätzen nur eine sekundäre Rolle zukommt. (shrink)

. The author conceives rules as action‐determining ideas. They are general and of hypothetical form, and they are of three semantic types: descriptive, technological, and normative rules. The most important categorisation of normative rules is the distinction between rules of behaviour and power‐conferring rules. Both kinds of rules are necessary to establish institutions. Principles are a special kind of normative rules. The social existence of normative rules is connected with their institutionalisation as frames for action. The dynamics of rules is (...) in principle based on two elements: on socially approved habit, and/or on authorised norm creation. (shrink)

The author criticizes Kelsen's distinction between static and dynamic systems of norms and his theory of legal dynamics. The author moreover presents the institutionalist conception of legal dynamics. Kelsen's concept of static systems is incompatible with normological scepticism: The deduction of rules from a basic principle depends on additional premises; even in static systems there is a kind of dynamics produced by actual facts. Kelsen's conception of legal dynamics is also incompatible with normological scepticism and with Kelsen's demand of purity (...) of jurisprudence. In the institutionalist conception Iegal dynamics is rather conceived as an interplay of legal norms and facts. Empowering relations, the principle of co‐validity, temporal limits of norms, derogation, legal validity and the basic norm are analysed accordingly. Appendices deal with Paulson's empowering theory of legal norm and Lippold's double‐faced reconstruction of the legal order. (shrink)

In this paper the author first presents a critical account of some basic views of Habermas' Discourse Philosophy. He points out some difficulties inherent in notions such as valid justification in argumentation theory, in the notion of ideal form of discourses, and in consensus theory of truth. Secondly, he focuses on Habermas' conceptions of validity, acceptance and legitimacy of law from the perspective of neo‐institutionalism. In particular, (i) the author argues that Habermas' definition of legal validity is unclear and unrealistic; (...) (ii) the author stresses the distinction between acceptance and acceptability; (iii) Habermas presupposes harmony between sovereignty and human rights postulates, but the present author takes into account the possibility of conflicts between autonomous popular decisions and human rights which must be resolved by methods of discursive democracy; (iv) criteria for acceptance of law cannot be fixed by a stipulative definition, but are in social discussion; (v) legitimacy is not an objective feature of valid law and presupposes an evaluation based on our political convictions. (shrink)

Criticizes traditional deontic logic and argues in favor of a genuine logic of norms. Gives a structure analysis of the so- called practical inference and of nomic causal propositions, and provides a critical account of von Wright's practical philosophy. The work also offers critical analyses of discourse rationality and of Wittgensteien's views on philosophizing, and includes an homage to von Wright. Of interest to readers in philosophical logic, practical philosophy, sociology of institutions, legal philosophy, and theory democracy. Annotation copyrighted by (...) Book News, Inc., Portland, OR. (shrink)

The author outlines his views on the essence of philosophical logic. There are two means of philosophical argumentation: intuition and analysis of the problem situation under examination. Logical intuition can be replaced by improved intuition based on new intellectual constructions. Then the author explains—in opposition to von Wright—the main philosophical traits of his conception of norm logic. The structure of the information processing determining action justifies the application of dichotomous semantics in action theory and in practical philosophy. The theory of (...) action and institutions is based on three anthropological features of man: our capacity of acting, our being a zoon politikon, and our capacity to form institutions. These features determine our ontology, our semantics and the logics of practical thinking. The action‐theoretical approach leads to a formal and finalistic theory of action in which action is not only analysed as an element of the norm content, but as the essential basis of the whole field of practical philosophy. In the frame of this action theory a conception of freedom of will is provided which does not contrast with determinism. The formalism of action is applied in two different problem situations: in action deliberation and in motive interpretation. Jørgensen's dilemma is discussed and overcome by the introduction of a generalised notion of inference. Deontic logic is confronted with the idea of a genuine logic of norms. The main principles of norm logic are discussed and a normative conditional is introduced. Von Wright's conception of a genuine norm logic is confronted with the present author's conception. The author shows that norm‐logical skepticism would be detrimental to analytical jurisprudence. (shrink)

Die analytische Jurisprudenz ist abhängig von der Normenlogik, die bisher keine voll befriedigenden Ergebnisse erzielt hat. Der Autor diskutiert die verschiedenen Wege der Normenlogik und deren Schwierigkeiten, insbesondere weist er nach, daß die normenlogische Deduktion nicht auf der Idee der deontisch perfekten Welten aufgebaut werden kann. Trotz der Grundlagenschwierigkeiten der Normenlogik muß diese als Basis der juristischen Analysen angesehen werden. Neben den inneren Schwierigkeiten der Normenlogik steht die analytische Jurisprudenz vor dem Problem, inwieweit das juristische Denken auf rein logischen und (...) inwieweit es auf rhetorischen Argumentationen fußt. Es wird auch ein Katalog der aktuellen Probleme der analytischen Jurisprudenz vorgelegt. (shrink)

Rescher charakterisiert die Gesetzesaussage durch a) nomische Notwendigkeit, b) hypothetische Kraft; Gesetzeshaftigkeit sei Bereitschaft zur faktentranszendenten Anwendungeines Allsatzes. Dem wird die These gegenübergestellt, daß die Struktur des nomischen Allsatzes so zu bestimmen ist, daß die faktentranszendente Anwendung durch den Satz begründet erscheint. Dies wird durch einen Allsatz erreicht, der nicht nur über die reale Welt, sondern auch über ein System von Alternativwelten über der realen Welt spricht. Durch den nomischen Allsatz wird gleichzeitig die nomische Notwendigkeit expliziert. Die Begründung der faktentranszendenten (...) Geltung ist gleich stark wie jene der erfahrungszendenten Gehung in der realen Weh. (shrink)

Summary The author stresses the fact-transcendent import of knowledge. A non-ontological theory of possibility is given as well as an extensional explication of fact-transcendent and contrary-to-fact conditionals by defining the fact-transcending conditional as an extensional conditional within a field of possibilities over a domain of states of affairs. The theory of fact-transcendent conditionals is used to establish an explication of nomological and quasinomological sentences. Some methodological consequences of this conception are discussed.

We experience evidence, but experienced evidence does not entail objective validity of the evident content. There are different kinds of intuitive evidence: logical and analytical evidence, the presuppositions of realism etc.; there is intuitive evidence in the cognitive field as well as in the practical realm. Intuitive evidence is linked with the basic framework of the respective field. Intuition may be replaced by deeper intuition on the basis of new views that evoke a reconstruction of the framework. Value intuition is (...) characterized as an established opinion which seems undubitable. All persons, all groups and all institutions have actually some practical convictions on which they found their practical evaluation. (shrink)

Political and juristic enquiry must be conceived of as an action theoretical approach. On the basis of his formal and finalistic action theory as well as his neo‐institutionalist view, the author sketches the role of information in modern democracy. He holds the view that democratic institutions are always in danger of being misused. The complex role of mass media, party propaganda and the detrimental effects of state propaganda are analyzed. The author deals with some general features of information processes in (...) the realm of political practice: Information has to be considered in relation to action; the message by itself does not show whether the information is true; there are two forms of reception of information, active and passive reception. Information processes have a deep influence on personal as well as on political liberty. The intrusion of marketing‐methods of propaganda in political practice is a great danger for democratic life, particularly if realized by the state or central institutions. It can destroy intellectual freedom, which is a prerequisite of discursive democracy. Democracy and human liberty can flourish only in an open society. (shrink)

Once affirmed that a formal and finalistic theory of action is one of the four pillars of neo‐institutionalism, the author introduces the concept of Freedom of action, which is based on two points: the empirical existence of a scope for action and an information process which determine the choice between alternative actions. He then analyzes different versions of determinism and the distinction between descriptive and practical sentences, and concludes that a theory of action based on the information process has to (...) deal with the structures of teleological thought. In this sense he stresses the practical relevance of the plurality of ends, often conflicting with each other. Finally, he explains how formal teleology is used in his theory of action and how this theory provides methodological achievements for jurisprudence.*. (shrink)

Der Autor unterscheidet nicht nur Schichten der Semiotik, sondern auch syntaktische, semantische und pragmatische Sprachen. Bei diesen kann durch Interpretation eine Modifikation der Bedeutung von Ausdrücken eintreten. Interpretation ist die Bestimmung der Bedeutung von Ausdrücken einer pragmatischen Sprache. Die hermeneutische Methodik wird der hermeneutischen Philosophie gegenübergestellt. Als bedeutungsbestimmende Momente werden diskutiert: sprachliche Operationen, Wissen und Vorwissen, die gnoseologische Analyse der Problemsituation, die Funktion von Deutungsschemen, die Ich-Perspektive der Deutung, volitive Momente und Zielsetzung der Deutung. Die juristische Interpretation wird als Interpretation (...) unter Zwecken dargestellt. (shrink)