Exploring the Background: puzzles, afterthoughts, and replies

  • Celano B
1Citations
Citations of this article
6Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

In this paper I review the comments, and reply to the objections, put forward in the commentaries to my essay “Pre-conventions. A fragment of the Background”, published in issues n. 30 and 33 of Revus – Journal for Constitutional Theory and Philosophy of Law. My remarks fall under the following headings: 1. The social dimension of pre-conventions; 2. Pre-conventions and ordinary habits and dispositions; 3. Whether my examples are mistaken; 4. Reasons and causes; 5. Normative facts; 6. Whether abstract entities can be causes; 7. Are pre-conventions conditions of Lewis-conventions? 8. What can pre-conventions do for legal theory? 9. Whether I discharged my argumentative burdens.Raziskovanje Ozadja: zagonetke, nakdnadni razmisleki in odgovori. V tem zapisu avtor preuči komentarje in odgovori na kritike, naslovljene na njegovo besedilo Pred-konvencije. Fragment Ozadja, objavljene v številkah 30 in 33 Revije za ustavno teorijo in filozofijo prava - Revus. Svoje odgovore razdeli na naslednje sklope: 1. Družbena razsežnost pred-konvencij; 2. Pred-konvencije ter običajne navade in nagnjenja; 3. Ali so njegovi primeri napačni; 4. Razlogi in vzroki; 5. Normativna dejstva; 6. Ali so lahko abstraktne entitete vzroki; 7. Ali so pred-kovencije pogoj Lewis-konvencij?; 8. Kako so lahko pred-konvencije koristne za pravno teorijo?; 9. Ali se uspešno razbremeni argumentativnega bremena.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Celano, B. (2017). Exploring the Background: puzzles, afterthoughts, and replies. Revus, 33, 53–82. https://doi.org/10.4000/revus.3876

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free