A Revision of the Constitutive and Epistemic Coherence Theories in Law
This paper analyses and criticizes Joseph Raz's attacks on coherentist theories. It is argued that Raz's characterisation of epistemic coherence theories is too narrow and that his criticism of constitutive coherence theories is based on a conceptual mistake in his own description. The study is an indirect argument to rethink coherence theories of law and adjudication within a more powerful framework than that propounded by Raz.
No Supplementary Data
No Article Media
Document Type: Research Article
Affiliations: University of Cambridge, Corpus Christi College, Cambridge CB2 1RH, UK.
Publication date: 01 June 2001