Positivism, the New Haven School, and the Use of Force in International Law
BSIS Journal of International Studies, Vol. 3, p. 26, 2006
17 Pages Posted: 30 Oct 2010
Date Written: October 1, 2006
Abstract
It is common knowledge that different interpretations of laws lead to differences on what is regarded appropriate responses to legally relevant circumstances. It is less well known, however, to what extent legal schools of thought differ with regard to more fundamental questions, namely what law actually is and how it is determined. Such methodological divergencies are often irreconcilable as they may rest on the political preferences of the respective proponents. A methodological and practical comparison of Positivism and the New Haven School lays bare the overwhelming importance of these divergencies in general and in the particular case of the use of force in international law. From a descriptive point of view both schools of thought are equally legitimate. Viewed against the background of the basic normative functions and purposes of law, however, New Haven School theorists are found to confuse the legal with the political sphere – with severe implications for their enhanced ability to justify the uses of force in international society.
Keywords: Public International Law, Positivism, New Haven School, Use of Force, legal theory, legal methodology
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation