Jurisprudence Essay Question
Watch
Announcements
Page 1 of 1
Skip to page:
Is the Hart/Dworkin debate relevant to legal practice? Does it make a difference to lawyers' arguments and judges' decisions if one or the other theorist is right?
0
reply
More law resources on TSR
(Original post by EU Yakov)
there's no debate lmao
there's no debate lmao
0
reply
Report
#4
(Original post by ssomani2000)
explain this please, also how are their theories relevant to legal practice?
explain this please, also how are their theories relevant to legal practice?
it's relevant to the sort of arguments made by a lawyer in an appeals court - that is, if you believe that the two genuinely disagreed
come on - i studied this 5 years ago and i remember it - it's not rocket science
Last edited by EU Yakov; 2 months ago
0
reply
(Original post by EU Yakov)
https://harvardlawreview.org/2017/06...hat-never-was/
it's relevant to the sort of arguments made by a lawyer in an appeals court - that is, if you believe that the two genuinely disagreed
come on - i studied this 5 years ago and i remember it - it's not rocket science
https://harvardlawreview.org/2017/06...hat-never-was/
it's relevant to the sort of arguments made by a lawyer in an appeals court - that is, if you believe that the two genuinely disagreed
come on - i studied this 5 years ago and i remember it - it's not rocket science
0
reply
Report
#6
what’s Hart’s theory of law? what’s Dworkin’s theory of law? are you struggling to understand the theories because yes clearly both relevant (they’re both on law) but maybe or maybe not it makes a difference to judicial decisions. if the answer is no (and i’m not saying it is) then what other theory seems more likely on how judges make law? there are unlimited arguments in jurisprudence so you have to reach your own conclusion. there are no right answers; only good arguments.
0
reply
X
Page 1 of 1
Skip to page:
Quick Reply
Back
to top
to top