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...
Autor: | |
---|---|
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).
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).