Legal Theory and Dialectically Contingent Justifications for the Principle of Generic Consistency

Bibliographic Data

ID8079709
AuthorsDeryck Beyleveld (0000-0001-9467-4417, corresponding author)
Year1996
Volume9
Issue1
Pages15-41
Publication date1996-03-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueRatio Juris (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 1794-6638 • E-ISSN: 2619-4066
PublisherWiley (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1111/j.1467-9337.1996.tb00224.x
OpenAlexW1990383578
LanguageEN
Citations received2
References cited19

It is argued that accepting that there are human rights, or that there are categorically binding requirements of any kind on action, logically requires accepting the PGC (Principle of Generic Consistency ) as the supreme criterion of practical reasonableness. Consequently, all legal systems that recognise human rights (hence, the English legal system), all who view law as a matter of obligation, and all who consider that there are categorically binding requirements on action, must take the PGC to be a necessary criterion of legal validity. Conventions on human rights must, as conventions on human rights , be interpreted to conform with the PGC

Consistency (knowledge bases · Epistemology · Computer Science · Multicultural Socio-Legal Studies · Philosophical Ethics and Theory · Psychology · Reformed Theology and Governance · Artificial Intelligence · Philosophy

Tools

Open DOISci-Hub