The Hans Kelsen fundamental hypothetical standard and the Herbert Hart recognition rule: similarities and differences between the validity criteria of the legal system
The validity of the legal system was thought by jus philosophers such as Hans Kelsen and Herbert Hart, respectively, the fundamental hypothetical norm and the rule of recognition. This article will address these concepts, with the goal of conducting a comparative study between the two, and then poin...
| Main Authors: | , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | deu |
| Published: |
Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina
2018-06-01
|
| Series: | Sequência: Estudos Juridicos e Politicos |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://periodicos.ufsc.br/index.php/sequencia/article/view/55225 |
| Summary: | The validity of the legal system was thought by jus philosophers such as Hans Kelsen and Herbert Hart, respectively, the fundamental hypothetical norm and the rule of recognition. This article will address these concepts, with the goal of conducting a comparative study between the two, and then pointing out their similarities and differences. To do so, we used the deductive approach and bibliographic research. At the end of the article, similarities were perceived, both being theoretical constructions of legal positivism of criterion of validity for the legal order, and differences, a logical-transcendental presupposition of validity (Kelsen) as an element of fact of validity (Hart). |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 0101-9562 2177-7055 |