1

Question 1

2 main questions in Philosophy of Law

Answer 1

o	Epistemological - Theory of Adjudication - methods of legal reasoning
o	Metaphysical (Ontological) - Theory of Law - defining a legal system

Question 2

2 types of theories re: phil/law

Answer 2

• Theories are descriptive (what actually happens) or normative (what should happen)

Question 3

what’s vulgar formalism?

Answer 3

simplest form (Beccaria, Zane) - legal reasoning is only syllogism
o If (1) Legal Rule, and (2) Case Facts > (3) Release or Punish
o What’s right: almost all judicial opinions involve syllogism
 Statement of law, statement of facts > legal conclusion follows

Question 4

prob w/vulgar formalism

Answer 4

o Problem - leaves out most of an opinion, i.e., ID legal rule & appropriate facts
 Could write syllogism, but how do we know how the appropriate legal rule & facts were chosen?
 Rule of law - What rule applies, where is it from, and is it really the rule the prior cases stand for?
 Appropriate facts & their legal significance?
• E.g., Bowers (general sodomy law, homosexual defendant)
• Majority - no legal right to homosexual acts
• Dissent - adult right to private, consensual sex at home

Question 5

• Sophisticated formalism (Dworkin)’s Two theses:

Answer 5

	Law is Rationally Determinate - the "class of legal reasons" justifies one and only one outcome in a dispute
•	Scope of this thesis can vary
	Adjudication is Autonomous - judge only needs class of legal reasons to decide a case
•	No need to rely on non-legal norms/reasons

Question 6

Class of legal reasons - reasons a judge properly uses to support their decision a2 sophisticated formalism

Answer 6

 Valid sources of law
 Legit. princip. of interp. of the sources to ID what rules they enact
 Legit. princip. of interp. of the facts to ID legal significance
• E.g., Bowers v. Hardwick above (homosexual sodomy)
 Valid forms of reasoning
• E.g., deduction, reason by analogy, arguments from authority

Question 7

legal realist a2