On The Identity and Difference of Law As Integrity and Philosophical Hermeneutics
18 Pages Posted: 16 Dec 2018
Date Written: December 16, 2018
In the existing intellectual history, many commentators hold that Ronald Dworkin’s law as integrity is the same as Hans-Georg Gadamer’s philosophical hermeneutics. This article would analyze their theoretical relationship along three dimensions: (a) how do judges cognize law? (b) what is the criterion to evaluate a legal interpretation? (c) what is the validity of a legal interpretation? Through these comparisons, there are both identity and differences between these two theories. On one hand, they both hold judges play a constructive role in the legal interpretation and they unavoidably take their own values or beliefs into jurisdictions. On the other hand, law as integrity regards the coherence theory of truth as the criterion to evaluate a legal interpretation, but philosophical hermeneutics upholds the correspondence theory of truth; the former considers the validity of a legal interpretation is the objectivity of this interpretation, but the latter repeals to the generality of consciousness experience.
Keywords: law as integrity, philosophical hermeneutics, constructivism, objectivity, legal interpretation
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation