On Raz Criticism to the Theory of Constitutive Rules

Authors

  • Carlos Alarcón Cabrera Universidad Pablo de Olavide, Sevilla, España

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.46661/revintpensampolit.7738

Keywords:

constitutive Rules, performatives, institucional facts, promise

Abstract

This paper analyzes the criticism of Raz to Searle, based on the fact that the theory of constitutives rules of Searle leads us inevitably to consider all norms are really constitutives. We could say that even primary norms are constituting new realities, and the facts they regulate are per se institutional.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Austin, John, How to do things with words. Londres, Oxford University Press, 1962.

González Lagier, Daniel, "Clasificar acciones. Sobre la crítica de Raz a las reglas constitutivas de Searle". En Doxa, 13 (1993), 265-276. https://doi.org/10.14198/DOXA1993.13.14

Rawls, John, "Two concepts of rules". En The Philosophical Review, 64 (1955), 3-32.

Rawls, John, A Theory of Justice. Cambridge (Mass.), Harvard University Press, 1971. https://doi.org/10.2307/2182230

Raz, Joseph, Practical Reason and Norms. Londres, Hutchinson, 1975. Juan Ruiz Manero (trad.): Razón práctica y normas. Madrid, Centro de estudios constitucionales, 1991.

Raz, Joseph, "Promises and Obligations". En: Hacker, P. / Raz, J., Law, Morality and Society. Essays in honour of H.L.A. Hart. Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1977, 210-228.

Ross, Alf, Directives and Norms. Londres, Routledge, 1968. José Hierro (trad.): Lógica de las normas. Madrid, Tecnos, 1971.

Searle, John, "How to derive ought from is". En The Philosophical Review, 71 (1962), 43-58. https://doi.org/10.2307/2183455

Searle, John, Speech Acts. Londres, Cambridge University Press, 1969. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139173438

Searle, John, The Construction of Social Reality. Londres, Allen Lane, 1991.

Published

2022-12-27

How to Cite

Alarcón Cabrera, C. . (2022). On Raz Criticism to the Theory of Constitutive Rules. International Journal of Political Thought, 17(1), 707–711. https://doi.org/10.46661/revintpensampolit.7738

Issue

Section

In Memoriam