Ronald Drowkin on Hart’s Postcript(Ronald Dworkin對於哈特後記的批判)


將近一個月後的恢復更新,部落格轉載了Harvard Law Review最新一期內容,他們刊載了Ronald Dworkin在生前一直未出版的文章,對於哈特法律的概念中「後記」的回應。HLR在同期中亦刊載了Nicos Stavropoulos對於Dworkin文章的背景說明。Nicos Stavropoulos的介紹文章在此(按此瀏覽),而Ronald Dworkin的文章在此(按此瀏覽


Dworkin dithered for a long time but publication remained on the cards. A few years later he confirmed that he intended to publish “a substantial response” to the Postscript in the near future. To my knowledge he never made a firm decision either way and eventually lost the draft. He was unable to provide a copy when, many years later, I couldn’t locate mine and discovered that everyone else seemed also to have lost theirs: he said that his original electronic file was lost when his hard disk failed. (I am grateful to Dr. Luís Duarte d’Almeida, who sent me a scan of the manuscript that had somehow come into his possession.)

我尚未很仔細地將Hart’s Posthumous Reply做論證分析,但是初步閱讀的想法是,對於Ronald Dworkin理論有興趣的人,應該不能錯過這一篇,雖然他在法理論的成熟想法都已經出版,但是這一篇在行文的風格上都跟他成熟著作有一些差別!光是文字就可以見到他如何看待哈特會如何看待他自己的後記,以及他如何遲一個保留態度上閱讀哈特的後記!!強烈推薦給大家!!千萬不要錯過!!


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s