Defeasibility of Rules and Principles. A Proposal for Analysis

Descripción del Articulo

In this article I am going to analyze and criticize the proposal for conceptualizing the defeasibility of rules and the defeasibility of principles in the theses of Manuel Atienza and Juan Ruiz Manero. For this purpose, Iwill carry out a brief critical reconstruction of their proposal of distinction...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor: García Yzaguirre, Victor
Formato: artículo
Fecha de Publicación:2021
Institución:Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú
Repositorio:Revistas - Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú
Lenguaje:español
OAI Identifier:oai:revistaspuc:article/23741
Enlace del recurso:http://revistas.pucp.edu.pe/index.php/derechopucp/article/view/23741
Nivel de acceso:acceso abierto
Materia:Rules
Principles
Defeasibility
Mandate norms
Interpretation
Reglas
Principios
Derrotabilidad
Normas de mandato
Interpretación
id REVPUCP_9a9d616f5c3d2337d82fa5d57690d82f
oai_identifier_str oai:revistaspuc:article/23741
network_acronym_str REVPUCP
network_name_str Revistas - Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú
repository_id_str
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Defeasibility of Rules and Principles. A Proposal for Analysis
Derrotabilidad de reglas y principios. Una propuesta de análisis
title Defeasibility of Rules and Principles. A Proposal for Analysis
spellingShingle Defeasibility of Rules and Principles. A Proposal for Analysis
García Yzaguirre, Victor
Rules
Principles
Defeasibility
Mandate norms
Interpretation
Reglas
Principios
Derrotabilidad
Normas de mandato
Interpretación
title_short Defeasibility of Rules and Principles. A Proposal for Analysis
title_full Defeasibility of Rules and Principles. A Proposal for Analysis
title_fullStr Defeasibility of Rules and Principles. A Proposal for Analysis
title_full_unstemmed Defeasibility of Rules and Principles. A Proposal for Analysis
title_sort Defeasibility of Rules and Principles. A Proposal for Analysis
dc.creator.none.fl_str_mv García Yzaguirre, Victor
author García Yzaguirre, Victor
author_facet García Yzaguirre, Victor
author_role author
dc.subject.none.fl_str_mv Rules
Principles
Defeasibility
Mandate norms
Interpretation
Reglas
Principios
Derrotabilidad
Normas de mandato
Interpretación
topic Rules
Principles
Defeasibility
Mandate norms
Interpretation
Reglas
Principios
Derrotabilidad
Normas de mandato
Interpretación
description In this article I am going to analyze and criticize the proposal for conceptualizing the defeasibility of rules and the defeasibility of principles in the theses of Manuel Atienza and Juan Ruiz Manero. For this purpose, Iwill carry out a brief critical reconstruction of their proposal of distinction in order to indicate in a concise, clear and precise way how they understand the defeasibility of prescriptive norms. I will do that for the purpose of justifiying three points: a) the defeat of rules is better understood as a reinterpretativeprocess of legal material; b) defeating rules is not equivalent to defeating principles; and c) the language of rules and principles presents the same operations and results as the language of recalcitrant experiences and axiological gaps, only that, unlike these, the first of the languages presupposes a prescriptive claim about how the language of the legal material should be understood. To achieve this objective, I will take the following steps: in section II, I will present critically the distinction between rules and principles, the notion of licit and illicit atypical act, and what it means to say that rules are resistant to principles. In section III, I will present that the reconstructed thesis suffer from ambiguity when they develop the notion of defeasibility.They present, on the one hand, a problem of superability between norms and, on the other, a problem of apparent relevance of a norm to solve an individual case. Likewise, I will offer a proposal to reformulate the defeat of rules from the theory of interpretation. Finally, I will end by showing that the language of rules and principles presupposes a normative thesis about how norms should be identified.
publishDate 2021
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2021-11-25
dc.type.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.none.fl_str_mv http://revistas.pucp.edu.pe/index.php/derechopucp/article/view/23741
10.18800/derechopucp.202102.011
url http://revistas.pucp.edu.pe/index.php/derechopucp/article/view/23741
identifier_str_mv 10.18800/derechopucp.202102.011
dc.language.none.fl_str_mv spa
language spa
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv http://revistas.pucp.edu.pe/index.php/derechopucp/article/view/23741/23236
http://revistas.pucp.edu.pe/index.php/derechopucp/article/view/23741/23514
http://revistas.pucp.edu.pe/index.php/derechopucp/article/view/23741/23515
dc.rights.none.fl_str_mv Derechos de autor 2021 Victor García Yzaguirre
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv Derechos de autor 2021 Victor García Yzaguirre
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
text/html
application/epub+zip
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Derecho PUCP; Núm. 87 (2021): Diálogos entre el sistema de Derecho Civil y el Common Law; 373-404
2305-2546
0251-3420
reponame:Revistas - Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú
instname:Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú
instacron:PUCP
instname_str Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú
instacron_str PUCP
institution PUCP
reponame_str Revistas - Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú
collection Revistas - Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú
repository.name.fl_str_mv
repository.mail.fl_str_mv
_version_ 1840900880698703872
spelling Defeasibility of Rules and Principles. A Proposal for AnalysisDerrotabilidad de reglas y principios. Una propuesta de análisisGarcía Yzaguirre, VictorRulesPrinciplesDefeasibilityMandate normsInterpretationReglasPrincipiosDerrotabilidadNormas de mandatoInterpretaciónIn this article I am going to analyze and criticize the proposal for conceptualizing the defeasibility of rules and the defeasibility of principles in the theses of Manuel Atienza and Juan Ruiz Manero. For this purpose, Iwill carry out a brief critical reconstruction of their proposal of distinction in order to indicate in a concise, clear and precise way how they understand the defeasibility of prescriptive norms. I will do that for the purpose of justifiying three points: a) the defeat of rules is better understood as a reinterpretativeprocess of legal material; b) defeating rules is not equivalent to defeating principles; and c) the language of rules and principles presents the same operations and results as the language of recalcitrant experiences and axiological gaps, only that, unlike these, the first of the languages presupposes a prescriptive claim about how the language of the legal material should be understood. To achieve this objective, I will take the following steps: in section II, I will present critically the distinction between rules and principles, the notion of licit and illicit atypical act, and what it means to say that rules are resistant to principles. In section III, I will present that the reconstructed thesis suffer from ambiguity when they develop the notion of defeasibility.They present, on the one hand, a problem of superability between norms and, on the other, a problem of apparent relevance of a norm to solve an individual case. Likewise, I will offer a proposal to reformulate the defeat of rules from the theory of interpretation. Finally, I will end by showing that the language of rules and principles presupposes a normative thesis about how norms should be identified.En el presente artículo voy a analizar críticamente la propuesta de conceptualización de derrotabilidad de reglas y derrotabilidad de principios en las tesis de Manuel Atienza y Juan Ruiz Manero. Para tales efectos realizaré una breve reconstrucción de sus propuestas con el fin de justificar tres puntos: a) la derrota de reglas es mejor entendida como un proceso reinterpretativo del material jurídico; b) derrotar reglas no es equivalente a derrotar principios; y c) el lenguaje de las reglas y los principios presenta las mismas operaciones y resultados que el lenguaje de las experiencias recalcitrantes y de las lagunas axiológicas, solo que, a diferencia de estas, el primero de los lenguajes presupone una pretensión prescriptiva sobre cómo debe ser entendido el material jurídico. Para alcanzar estos objetivos tomaré los siguientes pasos: en lasección II presentaré de forma crítica su distinción entre reglas y principios, la noción de lícito e ilícito atípico, y qué quiere decir que las reglas sean resistentes a principios. En la sección III discutiré el que las tesis reconstruidas padezcan de ambigüedad al momento de hablar de derrotabilidad. Presentan, por un lado, un problema de superabilidad entre normas y, por el otro, un problema de relevancia aparente de una norma para resolver un caso individual. Asimismo, ofreceré una propuesta de reformulación de la derrota de reglas desde la teoría de la interpretación. Por último, finalizaré mostrando que el lenguaje de las reglas y los principios presupone una tesis normativa sobre cómo deben ser identificadas las normas.Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú2021-11-25info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdftext/htmlapplication/epub+ziphttp://revistas.pucp.edu.pe/index.php/derechopucp/article/view/2374110.18800/derechopucp.202102.011Derecho PUCP; Núm. 87 (2021): Diálogos entre el sistema de Derecho Civil y el Common Law; 373-4042305-25460251-3420reponame:Revistas - Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perúinstname:Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perúinstacron:PUCPspahttp://revistas.pucp.edu.pe/index.php/derechopucp/article/view/23741/23236http://revistas.pucp.edu.pe/index.php/derechopucp/article/view/23741/23514http://revistas.pucp.edu.pe/index.php/derechopucp/article/view/23741/23515Derechos de autor 2021 Victor García Yzaguirrehttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessoai:revistaspuc:article/237412025-01-14T17:29:29Z
score 13.243185
Nota importante:
La información contenida en este registro es de entera responsabilidad de la institución que gestiona el repositorio institucional donde esta contenido este documento o set de datos. El CONCYTEC no se hace responsable por los contenidos (publicaciones y/o datos) accesibles a través del Repositorio Nacional Digital de Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación de Acceso Abierto (ALICIA).