Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Vagueness and LawPhilosophical and Legal Perspectives$
Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content.

Geert Keil and Ralf Poscher

Print publication date: 2016

Print ISBN-13: 9780198782889

Published to Oxford Scholarship Online: January 2017

DOI: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198782889.001.0001

Show Summary Details
Page of

PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (oxford.universitypressscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2022. All Rights Reserved. An individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a monograph in OSO for personal use.date: 18 May 2022

Can Legal Practice Adjudicate Between Theories of Vagueness?

Can Legal Practice Adjudicate Between Theories of Vagueness?

Chapter:
(p.95) 4 Can Legal Practice Adjudicate Between Theories of Vagueness?
Source:
Vagueness and Law
Author(s):

Hrafn Asgeirsson

Publisher:
Oxford University Press
DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198782889.003.0005

Scott Soames has argued that the fact that lawmakers and other legal practitioners regard vagueness as having a valuable power-delegating function gives us reason to favour one theory of vagueness over another. If Soames is right, facts about legal practice can in an important sense adjudicate between rival theories of vagueness. I argue that due to what I call the ‘Gappiness Problem’—raised by recent critics of the ‘communicative-content theory of law’—we must give up the one premise of Soames’s argument that he seems to take to be uncontroversial: that the legal content of a statute or constitutional clause is identical with, or constituted by, its communicative content. I provide my own account of legal content and show how it provides a response to the Gappiness Problem. This account, however, does not suffice to vindicate Soames’s argument. I conclude by arguing that my point about Soames’s argument is generalizable.

Keywords:   jurisprudence, law and language, metaethics, philosophy of language, philosophy of law, theories of vagueness, vagueness

Oxford Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.

Please, subscribe or login to access full text content.

If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

To troubleshoot, please check our FAQs , and if you can't find the answer there, please contact us .