Concept or Context? The Exchanges between Ross and Kelsen on Valid Law and Efficacy

Abstract

The aim of this paper is to point out the salient patterns of agreement and dis- agreement between Alf Ross and Hans Kelsen's analyses of valid law and efficacy. I argue that the disagreement has the character of systemic postulation on the part of both interlocutors. My main thesis is that the disagreement is not one of philosophical principle, but one that must be resolved on the basis of pragmatic considerations, i.e., the choice between the two valid-law schemes pertains neither to necessity nor to truth, but to expediency and values.