Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T15:52:52.007Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

THEORIES OF VAGUENESS AND THEORIES OF LAW

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 April 2019

Alex Silk
Alex Silk*
Affiliation:
University of Birmingham
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

It is common to think that what theory of linguistic vagueness is correct has implications for debates in philosophy of law. I disagree. I argue that the implications of particular theories of vagueness on substantive issues of legal theory and practice are less far-reaching than often thought. I focus on four putative implications discussed in the literature concerning (i) the value of vagueness in the law, (ii) the possibility and value of legal indeterminacy, (iii) the possibility of the rule of law, and (iv) strong discretion. I conclude with some methodological remarks. Delineating questions about conventional meaning, legal content determination, and norms of legal interpretation and judicial practice can motivate clearer answers and a more refined understanding of the space of overall theories of vagueness, interpretation, and law.

Type
Research Article
Information
Legal Theory , Volume 25 , Issue 2 , June 2019 , pp. 132 - 152
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2019 

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.)

Footnotes

*

Thanks to the Edinburgh Legal Theory Seminar for discussion, and to two anonymous referees for comments. This research has benefited from the support of an AHRC Early Career Research Grant and a Leverhulme Trust Research Fellowship.

References

REFERENCES

Asgeirsson, Hrafn, Vagueness and Power Delegation in Law: A Reply to Sorensen, in Current Legal Issues: Law and Language 344–355 (Freeman, Michael & Smith, Fiona eds., 2013).Google Scholar
Asgeirsson, Hrafn, On the Instrumental Value of Vagueness in the Law, 125 Ethics 425 (2015).Google Scholar
Barnes, Elizabeth, Ontic Vagueness, 44 Noûs 601 (2010).Google Scholar
Bix, Brian H., A Dictionary of Legal Theory (2004).Google Scholar
Dworkin, Ronald, Taking Rights Seriously (1977).Google Scholar
Dworkin, Ronald, A Matter of Principle (1985).Google Scholar
Dworkin, Ronald, On Gaps in the Law, in Controversies About Law's Ontology 84–90 (Amselek, Paul & MacCormick, Neil eds., 1991).Google Scholar
Endicott, Timothy, Vagueness and Legal Theory, 3 Legal Theory 37 (1997).Google Scholar
Endicott, Timothy, Vagueness in Law (2000).Google Scholar
Endicott, Timothy, Vagueness and Law, in Vagueness: A Guide 171–191 (Ronzitti, Guiseppina ed., 2011).Google Scholar
Endicott, Timothy, The Value of Vagueness, in Philosophical Foundations of Language in the Law 14–30 (Marmor, Andrei & Soames, Scott eds., 2011).Google Scholar
Endicott, Timothy, Law and Language, in The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Zalta, Edward N. ed., 2016), https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2016/entries/law-language/.Google Scholar
Forrester, James William, Why You Should: The Pragmatics of Dontic Speech (1989).Google Scholar
Green, Leslie, Legal Positivism, in The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Zalta, Edward N. ed., 2018), https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2018/entries/legal-positivism/.Google Scholar
H.L.A. Hart, The Concept of Law (2d ed. 1961/1994).Google Scholar
Hawthorne, John, Epistemicism and Semantic Plasticity, in Metaphysical Essays 185–210 (2006).Google Scholar
Heim, Irene & Kratzer, Angelika, Semantics in Generative Grammar (1998).Google Scholar
Horgan, Terence, Robust Vagueness and the Forced-March Sorites Paradox, 8 Phil. Persp. 159 (1994).Google Scholar
Hyde, Dominic & Raffman, Diana, Sorites Paradox, in The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Zalta, Edward N. ed., 2018), https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2018/entries/sorites-paradox/.Google Scholar
Jónsson, Ólafur Páll, Vagueness, Interpretation, and the Law, 15 Legal Theory 193 (2009).Google Scholar
Kaplan, David, Demonstratives, in Themes from Kaplan 481–563 (Almog, Joseph, Perry, John & Wettstein, Howard eds., 1989).Google Scholar
Keefe, Rosanna, Theories of Vagueness (2000).Google Scholar
Vagueness and Law: Philosophical and Legal Perspectives (Keil, Geert & Poscher, Ralf eds., 2016).Google Scholar
Kelsen, Hans, General Theory of Norms (1991).Google Scholar
Klein, Ewan, A Semantics for Positive and Comparative Adjectives, 4 Ling. & Phil. 1 (1980).Google Scholar
Lewis, David, Languages and Language, in Minnesota Studies in Philosophy of Science 3–35 (Gunderson, Keith ed., 1975).Google Scholar
Lyons, David, The Concept of Law (Second Edition) by H.L.A. Hart, 111 Law Q. Rev. 519 (1995).Google Scholar
Andrei Marmor, The Language of Law (2014).Google Scholar
Marcin Morzycki, Modification (2015).Google Scholar
Plunkett, David & Shapiro, Scott, Law, Morality, and Everything Else: General Jurisprudence as a Branch of Metanormative Inquiry, 128 Ethics 37 (2017).Google Scholar
Poscher, Ralf, Ambiguity and Vagueness in Legal Interpretation, in The Oxford Handbook of Language and Law 128–144 (Tiersma, Peter M. & Solan, Lawrence M. eds., 2012).Google Scholar
Raffman, Diana, Vagueness and Context Relativity, 81 Phil. Stud. 175 (1996).Google Scholar
Raffman, Diana, Unruly Words (2014).Google Scholar
Railton, Peter, ‘ We'll See You in Court!’: The Rule of Law as an Explanatory and Normative Kind, in Dimensions of Normativity: New Essays on Metaethics and Jurisprudence 1–22 (Plunkett, David, Shapiro, Scott J. & Toh, Kevin eds., 2019).Google Scholar
Raz, Joseph, The Rule of Law and Its Virtue, in The Authority of Law 210–229 (1979/2009).Google Scholar
Sassoon, Galit, Vagueness, Gradability and Typicality: The Interpretation of Adjectives and Nouns (2013).Google Scholar
Sauerland, Uli & Stateva, Penka, Two Types of Vagueness, in Vagueness and Language Use 121–145 (Égré, Paul & Klinedinst, Nathan eds., 2011).Google Scholar
Schiffer, Stephen, A Little Help from Your Friends?, 7 Legal Theory 421 (2001).Google Scholar
Schiffer, Stephen, Philosophical and Jurisprudential Issues of Vagueness, in Vagueness and Law: Philosophical and Legal Perspectives 23–48 (Keil, Geert & Poscher, Ralf eds., 2016).Google Scholar
Shapiro, Scott J., The ‘Hart-Dworkin’ Debate: A Short Guide for the Perplexed, in Ronald Dworkin 22–55 (Ripstein, Arthur ed., 2007).Google Scholar
Shapiro, Stewart, Vagueness in Context (2006).Google Scholar
Silk, Alex, Evaluational Adjectives (2015) (unpublished manuscript, University of Birmingham), https://goo.gl/Ocvuo7.Google Scholar
Silk, Alex, Discourse Contextualism: A Framework for Contextualist Semantics and Pragmatics (2016).Google Scholar
Silk, Alex, Normativity in Language and Law, in Dimensions of Normativity: New Essays on Metaethics and Jurisprudence 287–313 (Plunkett, David, Shapiro, Scott J. & Toh, Kevin eds., 2019).Google Scholar
Silk, Alex, Comparative Vagueness (2018) (unpublished manuscript, University of Birmingham), https://goo.gl/2dyC8L.Google Scholar
Soames, Scott, Understanding Truth (1999).Google Scholar
Soames, Scott, Interpreting Legal Texts: What Is, and What Is Not, Special About the Law, in Philosophical Essays, Vol. 1 403–423 (2009).Google Scholar
Soames, Scott, What Vagueness and Inconsistency Tell Us About Interpretation, in Philosophical Foundations of Language in the Law 31–57 (Marmor, Andrei & Soames, Scott eds., 2011).Google Scholar
Soames, Scott, Vagueness and the Law, in The Routledge Companion to Philosophy of Law 95–108 (Marmor, Andrei ed., 2012).Google Scholar
Soames, Scott, Toward a Theory of Legal Interpretation, in Analytic Philosophy in America 299–319 (2014).Google Scholar
Sorensen, Roy, Blindspots (1988).Google Scholar
Sorensen, Roy, Vagueness Has No Function in Law, 7 Legal Theory 387 (2001).Google Scholar
Williamson, Timothy, Vagueness (1994).Google Scholar