Class Year

2014

Date

4-22-2014

Document Type

Thesis

Distinguished Thesis

Yes

Degree Name

Bachelor of Arts (BA)

Department or Program

Philosophy

First Advisor

Chad McCracken

Second Advisor

Janet McCracken

Third Advisor

Daw-Nay R. Evans, Jr.

Fourth Advisor

Rachel Avon Whidden

Abstract

Two new legal philosophies took shape in the twentieth century, legal realism and legal interpretivism. Legal realists are skeptical of law and the legal reasoning done in courts. Ronald Dworkin’s philosophy, legal interpretivism, views legal reasoning as part of the coherent narrative that justifies the role of law in society. The realist movement is often traced to the philosophy of Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., whose thinking bears similarities to that of Friedrich Nietzsche. Taking Jerome Frank’s philosophy as the epitome of legal realism, I argue that Holmes and Nietzsche would prefer Dworkin’s legal interpretivism rather than Frank’s legal realism. This project illuminates the differences between Dworkin and Frank, as well as showing a realist lineage in Dworkin. This ultimately makes interpretivism a more palatable philosophy to Holmes and Nietzsche, who, when given a sympathetic exegesis, have more subtle, nuanced views of law.

Available for download on Saturday, July 01, 2017


Share

COinS