Defending the Indeterminacy Thesis
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 23175353 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Mark Tushnet (0000-0002-9316-0905, corresponding author), Mark V Tushnet |
| Year | 1998 |
| Pages | 223-238 |
| Publication date | 1998-09-10 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | CHAPTER |
| Venue | Analyzing law (SOURCE_BOOK) |
| Publisher | Oxford University PressOxford (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1093/oso/9780198265832.003.0018 |
| OpenAlex | W4388418199 |
| ISBN | 9780198265832 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 3 |
In Determinacy, Objectivity, and Authority, Jules Coleman and Brian Leiter address what they describe as attacks on analytic jurisprudence from critical legal studies and other forms of modern American legal thought. Although Coleman and Leiter agree that there are ‘important ways in which the set of legal reasons will be indeterminate’, and that ‘certain forms of indeterminacy can pose a problem for the possibility of legitimate governance by law’, they conclude that these problems ‘are in no way fatal to the possibility of legitimate authority’.
Corporate governance · Determinacy · Economics · Epistemology · Indeterminacy (philosophy) · Indeterminate · Jurisprudence · Law and economics · Management · Objectivity (philosophy) · Political science · Sociology · American Constitutional Law and Politics · Free Will and Agency · Law · Mathematics · Philosophy · Political Philosophy and Ethics
| Unique citing works | 3 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 0,14 |
| Citation span | 2004 - 2013 (10) |
| Citation velocity | historical |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 1 |