The Practical Otiosity of Exclusionary Reasons

Canadian Journal of Law and Jurisprudence 37 (2):457-473 (2024)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

One of Joseph Raz’s most influential contributions to legal philosophy is the Exclusionary Thesis, according to which any prescription that counts as mandatory is identical with an exclusionary reason that bars acting on certain reasons favoring noncompliance. This essay argues that exclusionary reasons are otiose in the sense there is no deliberative work they are ever needed to do under objective norms of practical reasoning.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 101,394

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

The Curious Case of Exclusionary Reasons.Emran Mian - 2002 - Canadian Journal of Law and Jurisprudence 15 (1):99-124.
How exclusionary reasons guide.Kenneth M. Ehrenberg - 2024 - Jurisprudence 15 (1):71-76.
‘Kinds of Practical Reasons: Attitude-Related Reasons and Exclusionary Reasons’.Christian Piller - 2006 - In S. Miguens, J. A. Pinto & C. E. Mauro (eds.), Analyses. Facultade de Letras da Universidade do Porto. pp. 98-105.
Exclusionary Reasons, Virtuous Motivation, and Legal Authority.Andrew Jordan - 2018 - Canadian Journal of Law and Jurisprudence 31 (2):347-64.
In defense of exclusionary reasons.N. P. Adams - 2021 - Philosophical Studies 178 (1):235-253.
Against Exclusionary Reasons as Only Razian Facts.Carlos Gálvez Bermúdez - forthcoming - International Journal for the Semiotics of Law - Revue Internationale de Sémiotique Juridique:1-21.

Analytics

Added to PP
2024-11-26

Downloads
7 (#1,638,362)

6 months
7 (#711,641)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references