Abstract
De acuerdo con Juan Carlos Bayón, el positivismo jurídico incluyente es inconsistente, por cuanto sus presupuestos alegadamente convencionalistas serían incompatibles con las consecuencias de la incorporación de principios morales como criterios de validez jurídica que esta corriente teórica asume como posibles. Concretamente, el positivismo incluyente enfrentaría un dilema: si sostiene que el derecho remite al juez a la moral positiva para la identificación de contenidos normativos, colapsa con la versión excluyente; si en cambio sostiene que el derecho remite al razonamiento moral sustantivo, se ve obligado a abandonar sus presupuestos convencionalistas, en favor del realismo moral. En este trabajo analizaré esta crítica de Bayón, e intentaré proponer un argumento con el cual afrontar dicho cuestionamiento.
Highlights
According to Juan Carlos Bayón, inclusive legal positivism is inconsistent, insofar as its allegedly conventionalist assumptions seem to be incompatible with the consequences of the incorporation of moral principles as criteria of legal validity that this theory acknowledges as possible
Inclusive positivism would face a dilemma: if it holds that the law directs the judge to recourse to positive morality in order to identify the legal contents, it collapses into the exclusive version of positivism; if, on the other hand, it holds that the law appeals to substantive moral reasoning, it becomes obliged to withdraw its conventionalist assumptions, in favor of moral realism
Partiendo de la base de que la tesis social sólo puede ser suscrita desde una perspectiva ontológica sobre el derecho que sea de tipo convencionalista —por oposición a enfoques realistas o escépticos— Bayón hace algunas distinciones en torno a las posibilidades expositivas del positivismo jurídico incluyente o incorporacionismo 3
Summary
According to Juan Carlos Bayón, inclusive legal positivism is inconsistent, insofar as its allegedly conventionalist assumptions seem to be incompatible with the consequences of the incorporation of moral principles as criteria of legal validity that this theory acknowledges as possible.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
