On The Identity and Difference of Law As Integrity and Philosophical Hermeneutics

18 Pages Posted: 16 Dec 2018

See all articles by Yingnan Zhao

Yingnan Zhao

Peking University Law School, Students

Date Written: December 16, 2018

Abstract

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

Zhao, Yingnan, On The Identity and Difference of Law As Integrity and Philosophical Hermeneutics (December 16, 2018). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3302130 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3302130

Yingnan Zhao (Contact Author)

Peking University Law School, Students ( email )

Beijing
China

Here is the Coronavirus
related research on SSRN

Paper statistics

Downloads
10
Abstract Views
162
PlumX Metrics