Abstract
This chapter examines apparently conflicting international legal theories to better understand disputes about international law. It concludes that even at the level of theory, disagreements are not purely conceptual. They are both normative and political disagreements. Every theory of international law is built on non-conceptual choices, including what facts from which to observe the phenomenon of international law and what quintessential system of law against which to compare the description of international law. Embedded in these selections are more non-conceptual choices, such as stipulations about the purpose of law, and about whether a theory of law must match the opinion of other people. Therefore, although legal theories are conceptual, they are also deeply normative as well as being political theories about morality, sovereignty, and how the world should be ordered.
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.
