Hart's Response to Gustav Radbruch Analytical Essay by Top Papers

Hart's Response to Gustav Radbruch
An analysis of H.L.A Hart's position on law and morality in contrast to that of Gustav Radbruch.
# 135241 | 1,250 words | 2 sources | MLA | 2007 | US
Published on Dec 01, 2007 in Philosophy (Ethics) , Law (General)


$19.95 Buy and instantly download this paper now

Description:

The paper relates that in the aftermath of the Second World War, Gustav Radbruch sharply denounced the Nazi era as a terrible break from the long tradition of lawful German jurisprudence; he especially argued that the laws of the Nazis were not laws at all because they had no moral foundations. The paper then discusses how H.L.A Hart, who - in direct contrast to Radbruch - was somewhat of a legal positivist, takes issue with the German academics essential points. Particularly, the paper explains that even while unimpressed by utilitarian arguments that law and "morality" can be separated, Hart asserts that subjective considerations come into play - but these subjective considerations are just as easily considerations about how a decision or law advances a practical aim as they are moral considerations; in other words, an accepted policy may be advanced that lacks a defensible moral foundation. The paper looks at how Hart asserts that morality is a subjective matter that can cloud the facts of the case before a justice; moral considerations, unlike determining what the law says about a specific act, are also fundamentally non-rational and that is deeply troubling. The paper concludes that to infuse one's legal interpretations with moral sensibilities is to threaten the stability of the law and to turn jurisprudence into an emotional and not rational exercise wherein laws lose their authority for non-rational and even capricious reasons.

From the Paper:

"In the aftermath of the Second World War, Gustav Radbruch sharply denounced the Nazi era as a terrible break from the long tradition of lawful German jurisprudence; he especially argued that the laws of the Nazis were not laws at all because they had no moral foundations. H.L.A Hart, who - in direct contrast to Radbruch - was somewhat of a legal positivist, takes issue with the German academics essential points. Particularly, even while unimpressed by utilitarian arguments that law and "morality" can be separated, Hart asserts that subjective considerations come into play - but these subjective considerations are just as easily..."

Cite this Analytical Essay:

APA Format

Hart's Response to Gustav Radbruch (2007, December 01) Retrieved January 21, 2021, from https://www.academon.com/analytical-essay/hart-response-to-gustav-radbruch-135241/

MLA Format

"Hart's Response to Gustav Radbruch" 01 December 2007. Web. 21 January. 2021. <https://www.academon.com/analytical-essay/hart-response-to-gustav-radbruch-135241/>

Comments