Abstract

Since Gallie introduced the notion of essentially contested concepts, it has given rise to considerable debate and confusion. The aim of this paper is to bring clarity to these debates by offering a critical reconstruction of the notion of essential contestedness. I argue that we should understand essentially contestable concepts as concepts that refer to ideals or to concepts and phenomena that can only be fully understood in light of ideals and that are, as a consequence, open to pervasive contestation. Moreover, some concepts are second-order essentially contested: it may be a matter of ongoing dispute as to whether they should be regarded as essentially contested. The concept of law is an example. Some authors argue that it is ideal-oriented, whereas others claim it is not. This insight that ‘law’ is a second-order essentially contested concept may explain some of the disagreements between legal positivism and its various opponents.

Highlights

  • In 1956, WB Gallie introduced the notion of essentially contested concepts

  • Gallie introduces the notion of essentially contested concepts as an explanation for evident and persistent disagreements as to the proper use of certain terms

  • Gallie’s suggestion that the notion of essentially contested concepts may help us understand the persistent nature of debates has been accepted in various disciplines, but it seems to have special traction in the study of law and politics

Read more

Summary

INTRODUCTION

In 1956, WB Gallie introduced the notion of essentially contested concepts. These were ‘concepts the proper use of which inevitably involves endless disputes about their proper uses on the part of their users’.1 Since the notion has become popular in various disciplines of the humanities and social sciences.[2]. I will suggest that the reason certain concepts are essentially contested or contestable is that they refer to an ideal or an ideal-oriented phenomenon Such an understanding in terms of ideals does justice to the most important ideas in Gallie’s work, and offers an illuminating framework for analysing normative debates. The insight that law is a second-order essentially contested concept may clarify some theoretical debates, especially those between legal positivists and non-positivists. Gallie introduces the notion of essentially contested concepts as an explanation for evident and persistent disagreements as to the proper use of certain terms. His examples include ‘art’, ‘democracy’, ‘the Christian tradition’, ‘social justice’ and ‘good’.10. In this paper, I will focus on legal and political concepts

GALLIE’S SEVEN CONDITIONS FOR IDENTIFYING ESSENTIALLY CONTESTED CONCEPTS
The Concept is Evaluative
The Concept is Internally Complex
The Concept is Variously Describable
The Concept Must be Open in Character
There is an Original Exemplar
EXPLAINING PERVASIVE DISAGREEMENTS IN LAW AND POLITICS
A CRITICAL RECONSTRUCTION IN TERMS OF IDEALS
A CONTROVERSIAL NOTION
LAW AS A SECOND-ORDER ESSENTIALLY CONTESTED CONCEPT
CONCLUSION
Full Text
Paper version not known

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 call

Disclaimer: 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.