The Hans Kelsen fundamental hypothetical standard and the Herbert Hart recognition rule: similarities and differences between the validity criteria of the legal system

The validity of the legal system was thought by jus philosophers such as Hans Kelsen and Herbert Hart, respectively, the fundamental hypothetical norm and the rule of recognition. This article will address these concepts, with the goal of conducting a comparative study between the two, and then poin...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Seqüência (Florianópolis, Brazil) Brazil), 2018-06, Vol.39 (78), p.91-118
Hauptverfasser: Alex Silva Gonçalves, Regio Hermilton Ribeiro Quirino
Format: Artikel
Sprache:ger ; por
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:The validity of the legal system was thought by jus philosophers such as Hans Kelsen and Herbert Hart, respectively, the fundamental hypothetical norm and the rule of recognition. This article will address these concepts, with the goal of conducting a comparative study between the two, and then pointing out their similarities and differences. To do so, we used the deductive approach and bibliographic research. At the end of the article, similarities were perceived, both being theoretical constructions of legal positivism of criterion of validity for the legal order, and differences, a logical-transcendental presupposition of validity (Kelsen) as an element of fact of validity (Hart). https://periodicos.ufsc.br/index.php/sequencia/issue/view/2669/showToc [Portuguese Abstract] Normal 0 21 false false false PT-BR X-NONE X-NONE /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Tabela normal" mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-parent:"" mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0cm; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; line-height:150%; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman",serif; mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman" mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi; mso-fareast-language:EN-US;} A validade do sistema jurídico foi pensada por jusfilósofos como Hans Kelsen e Herbert Hart, respectivamente, a norma hipotética fundamental e a regra de reconhecimento. Esse artigo enfrentará esses conceitos com o objetivo de realizar um estudo comparativo entre os dois e, então, apontar as suas semelhanças e diferenças. Para tanto, recorreu-se à abordagem dedutiva e à pesquisa de cunho bibliográfico. Ao final do artigo, será possível perceber a semelhança, construída a partir do positivismo jurídico, como um critério de validade para o ordenamento jurídico, e as diferenças pensadas a partir de pressuposto lógico-transcendental de validade (Kelsen) e do elemento de fato de validade (Hart).
ISSN:0101-9562
2177-7055
DOI:10.5007/2177-7055.2018v39n78p91