Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-6bf8c574d5-h6jzd Total loading time: 0.001 Render date: 2025-02-27T02:22:30.775Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

1 - Introduction

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 July 2017

By
George Duke  and
Robert P. George
Edited by
George Duke  and
Robert P. George
George Duke
Affiliation:
Deakin University, Victoria
Robert P. George
Affiliation:
Princeton University, New Jersey
Get access

Summary

A summary is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Chapter
Information
The Cambridge Companion to Natural Law Jurisprudence , pp. 1 - 14
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2017

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Works Cited

Dickson, J. 2001. Evaluation and Legal Theory. Hart.Google Scholar
Dickson, J. 2012. ‘Legal Positivism: Contemporary Debates’. In ed. Marmor, A.. The Routledge Companion to Philosophy of Law. Routledge: 48–64.Google Scholar
Edmundson, W.A. 2011. ‘Schmegality’. Jurisprudence 2: 273–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Finnis, J. 2011a. Natural Law and Natural Rights (2nd edition). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Finnis, J. 2011b. Collected Essays I: Reason in Action. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Finnis, J. 2011c. Collected Essays IV: Philosophy of Law. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Gardner, J. 2001. ‘Legal Positivism: 5½ Myths’. American Journal of Jurisprudence 46: 199–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
George, R.P. 1999. In Defense of Natural Law. Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Green, L. 2008. ‘Positivism and the Separability of Law and Morals’. New York University Law Review 83: 1035–1058Google Scholar
Green, L. 2016. ‘Legal Positivism’. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Last accessed 25 February 2016: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/legal-positivism/Google Scholar
Habermas, J. 1996. Between Facts and Norms. trans. Rehg, W.. Polity Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hershovitz, S. 2014. ‘The Model of Plans and the Prospects for Positivism’. Ethics 125: 152–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kelsen, H. 1927. Veröffentlichen der Vereinigung der Deutschen Staatsrechtslehrer vol. 3. Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Kretzmann, N. 1988. ‘Lex Iniusta Non Est Lex: Laws on Trial in Aquinas’ Court of Conscience’. American Journal of Jurisprudence 33: 99–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meyerson, D. 2007. Understanding Jurisprudence. Routledge.Google Scholar
Murphy, M.C. 2003. ‘Natural Law Jurisprudence’. Legal Theory 9: 241–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murphy, M.C. 2005. ‘Natural Law Theory’. In eds. Golding, M.P. and Edmundson, W.A.. The Blackwell Guide to the Philosophy of Law. Blackwell. 15–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murphy, M.C. 2011. ‘Review of Scott J. Shapiro Legality’. Law and Philosophy 30: 369–375.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murphy, M.C. 2013. ‘The Explanatory Role of the Weak Natural Law Thesis’. In eds. Waluchow, W. and Sciaraffa, S.. Philosophical Foundations of the Nature of Law. Oxford University Press: 3–21.Google Scholar
Oderberg, D.S. 2010. ‘The Metaphysical Foundations of Natural Law’. In ed. Zaborowski, H.. Natural Moral Law in Contemporary Society. Catholic University of America Press: 44–75.Google Scholar
Plunkett, D. 2013. ‘Legal Positivism and the Moral Aim Thesis’. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 33: 563–605.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Raz, J. 1986. The Morality of Freedom. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Shapiro, S. 2011a. Legality. Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shapiro, S. 2011b. ‘Planning Agency and the Law’. In eds. Bertea, S. and Pavlakos, G.. New Essays on the Normativity of Law. Hart Publishing.Google Scholar
Waldron, J. 2011. ‘Planning for Legality’. Michigan Law Review 109: 883–902.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×