Skip to main content
University of the Philippines Diliman | College of Social Sciences and Philosophy
  • Author: Enrique Benjamin R. Fernando III, MA
  • Year: 2021
  • Type: Peer-Reviewed Journal Article

Citation:

Fernando, Enrique Benjamin III R. (2021) “Semantic, Conceptual, and Interpretive Theories of Law.” Suri 9:2. pp. 43-72.

Abstract: 

A general jurisprudential theory explains the essential features of law. The objective of this paper is to provide a comparison of three kinds of jurisprudential theories that have dominated legal philosophy in the last seventy years. First, there are semantic theories that seek to understand the nature of law by digging out shared linguistic criteria that designate the correct use of legal terms. Second, there are interpretive theories that take the perspective of the judge in constructing the most moral interpretation the law to determine what it “really” says on a case. And third, there are conceptual theories which explicate the logical presuppositions, implications, and concepts that underlie legal phenomena and reveal more than what is made obvious by language. This paper shall also defend Legal Positivism—the view that law has social foundations—against Ronald Dworkin’s objection known as the “semantic sting”, which claims thatpositivists are unable to account for the existence of deep controversy in legal practice by virtue of allegedly treating law as a trivial linguistic enterprise. It shall argue, alternatively, that deep controversy occurs because law is an “essentially contested concept”, which in turn occurs because law is a complex social institution.

Key Words:

jurisprudence, semantic sting, legal positivism, ordinary language philosophy, essentially contested concepts

Link:

https://suri.pap73.org/issue14/fernando_suri_october2021.pdf