Exploring the Background: puzzles, afterthoughts, and replies
In this paper I review the comments, and reply to the objections, put forward in the commentaries to my essay “Pre-conventions. A fragment of the Background”, published in issues n. 30 and 33 of Revus – Journal for Constitutional Theory and Philosophy of Law. My remarks fall under the following head...
Uloženo v:
| Vydáno v: | URI:https://journals.openedition.org/revus, |
|---|---|
| Hlavní autor: | |
| Médium: | Article ou chapitre numérique |
| Jazyk: | Anglais |
| Vydáno: |
Revus
2017
|
| Témata: | |
| On-line přístup: | Accès Université d'Orléans et IFPM Accès Université d'Orléans et IFPM |
| Shrnutí: | In this paper I review the comments, and reply to the objections, put forward in the commentaries to my essay “Pre-conventions. A fragment of the Background”, published in issues n. 30 and 33 of Revus – Journal for Constitutional Theory and Philosophy of Law. My remarks fall under the following headings: 1. The social dimension of pre-conventions; 2. Pre-conventions and ordinary habits and dispositions; 3. Whether my examples are mistaken; 4. Reasons and causes; 5. Normative facts; 6. Whether abstract entities can be causes; 7. Are pre-conventions conditions of Lewis-conventions? 8. What can pre-conventions do for legal theory? 9. Whether I discharged my argumentative burdens. |
|---|