Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Rule of Law

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Law and Life. Why Law?

  • 483 Accesses

Abstract

As explained in Sect. 1.1, the core question in this book is how law changes life. In this context, the question comes up “Why do we have law?,” as further detailed in the first lines of Sect. 1.1.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 119.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Sections 1.1 and 1.2.

  2. 2.

    Sections 2.5 and 2.6.

  3. 3.

    Tamanaha (2004), p. 122.

  4. 4.

    Tamanaha (2004).

  5. 5.

    Tamanaha (2004), p. 114 ff. See also Tamanaha (2010).

  6. 6.

    In this sense also Sect. 2.2 hereafter, where the term “human construct” is used.

  7. 7.

    Tamanaha (2004), p. 7 ff.

  8. 8.

    Nor did Socrates. See on Socrates’ attitude toward law also Sect. 3.15 hereafter.

  9. 9.

    Tamanaha (2004), p. 12.

  10. 10.

    Approximately 11 years after the Council of Nicaea, organized by Constantine in 325 A.D.

  11. 11.

    Tamanaha (2004), p. 13.

  12. 12.

    Tamanaha (2004), p. 14.

  13. 13.

    Tamanaha (2004), p. 25.

  14. 14.

    Tamanaha (2004), p. 23.

  15. 15.

    Meaning: directed at systematic discovery of new elements (compare the Greek exclamation “eureka!”), as opposed to “dogmatic.”

  16. 16.

    See on this Tamanaha (2017), p. 57 ff. who uses the expressions “social construction,” “social artifact,” and “complexes of social institutions.” Tamanaha mentions and criticizes a number of theorists who think of law in terms of “necessary truths,” rather than “typical features.”

  17. 17.

    Compare Tamanaha (2017), p. 180 ff.

  18. 18.

    Rawls (1971), p. 3.

  19. 19.

    Aristotle-Thomson (2004), p. 111, xxii ff and Glossary, 308. In my view, the Aristotelian word hexis must be translated as disposition (habitus), rather than characteristic, as is often done. Compare: Ricoeur (2005), p. 8. Aristotle-Oswald (1999), p. 1129a, translates as “state of character.”

  20. 20.

    Rawls (1971), pp. 6–7.

  21. 21.

    Rawls (1971), p. 3.

  22. 22.

    Rawls (1971), p. 8.

  23. 23.

    Section 3.9.

  24. 24.

    Rawls (1971), p. 10.

  25. 25.

    Rawls (1971), p. 10.

  26. 26.

    Assembled in “Political Liberalism,” Rawls (2005). Instructive is in particular Rawls’ own “Introduction,” pp. xiii–xxxiv.

  27. 27.

    Rawls (2005), pp. 133–172. Ideas of the Good are discussed in pp. 173–211. An earlier version of “overlapping consensus” can be found in Rawls (1971) (Theory of Justice), p. 340. Critical comments on the consistency and tenability of Rawls’ new approach can be found in Waldron (1999), p. 149 ff.

  28. 28.

    Ricoeur (2000), pp. 1–10.

  29. 29.

    Ricoeur (2000), p. 4.

  30. 30.

    Ricoeur (2000), p. 5/6.

  31. 31.

    Ricoeur (2000), p. 7. See further on trust Sect. 3.9 of this book.

  32. 32.

    Ricoeur (2000), p. 8. Also: Ricoeur(2005), p. 8/9.

  33. 33.

    Ricoeur (2000), p. 131.

  34. 34.

    In Sect. 2.11.

  35. 35.

    Sen (2009), p. X.

  36. 36.

    Sen (2009), p. 10. Also p. 20, with reference to the classical Sanscrit contrast between niti and nyaya.

  37. 37.

    Sen (2009), p. 9, 15.

  38. 38.

    Sen (2009), p. 96.

  39. 39.

    Sen (2009), p. 97.

  40. 40.

    Sen (2009), p. IX.

  41. 41.

    Section 2.1. More on dialogue and discussion in Sect. 4.5.

  42. 42.

    More on morality and ethics in Sect. 3.2.

  43. 43.

    Machiavelli (1513), p. 54/55.

  44. 44.

    As mentioned in Sect. 1.2. See also in this sphere: Wolfram von Eschenbach, Parzival (von Eschenbach 1967).

  45. 45.

    Rawls (2005). A few words on this revised approach have been said in Sect. 6.

  46. 46.

    Wolff (2018).

  47. 47.

    Comey (2018).

  48. 48.

    See on Trump’s role also Ferguson (2017), pp. 11–12, 43, 383–389, 405.

  49. 49.

    Waldron (2016), pp. 2–22.

  50. 50.

    Waldron (2016), p. 6.

  51. 51.

    Waldron (2016), pp. 8–12.

  52. 52.

    In his paragraph 6, Waldron (2016), pp. 10–12.

  53. 53.

    With the difference again that there is nothing “existential” in Waldron’s approach.

  54. 54.

    As explained in Sects. 1.2, 3.6, and 3.7 of this book.

  55. 55.

    Arendt (1998), p. 22 ff. On p. 28 one finds the terms “public sphere of life” and “sphere of the polis,” followed by “public sphere” on p. 30. Following up on this I will at times use the expression “sphere of the public space” or, in connection with Arendt’s theories, “sphere of the public realm.”

  56. 56.

    Starting out with Arendt (1951), “The Origins of Totalitarianism,” which can be seen as the basis for most of later work.

  57. 57.

    “Highly idiosyncratic,” according to Margaret Conovan in her Introduction to Arendt (1998).

  58. 58.

    Arendt (1998), p. 22 ff. Compare Hol (2005) on adjudication in the public realm in the work of Hannah Arendt.

  59. 59.

    Arendt (1998), p. 28.

  60. 60.

    In this sense Hol (2005), p. 50, with regard to adjudication, who however does not fully agree with Arendt on this score. Nor do I, as may become clear in my Sect. 2.11, where I ask for “genuine interest and respect on the side of the professional” for the position of the individual who is adversely touched by the law in his personal life.

  61. 61.

    Which does not mean that Arendt has not seen the positive side of this personalization too. Compare on this Hol, p. 51 ff.

  62. 62.

    In Sect. 1.3.

  63. 63.

    Waldron (2016), pp. 290–307. The heading of this chapter is “The Constitutional Politics of Hannah Arendt.” Interesting comments on “free politics” and Arendt’s ideas on this topic can be found there.

  64. 64.

    Arendt (1998), p. 52. See about this image also Hol (2005), p. 42.

  65. 65.

    By Margaret Canovan, Arendt (1998), p. xiii.

  66. 66.

    Waldron (2016), p. 294.

  67. 67.

    German choreographer, 1901–1979. No reference is made to Kurt Jooss or his ballet by Hanna Arendt, Margaret Canovan, or Antoine Hol. No reference either by Waldron, even though he mentions “ballet” in one of his generous sentences in Waldron (2016) on p. 291.

  68. 68.

    See further on this connection Sect. 5.4 hereafter.

  69. 69.

    More on ownership in Sects. 4.2 and 4.3.

  70. 70.

    In this is central role is played by the powerful Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CIFUS).

  71. 71.

    Cooter and Ulen (2016), p. 7.

  72. 72.

    Cooter and Ulen (2016), pp. 9–10.

  73. 73.

    A concise, informative account on “access-based consumption” and “sustainability” can be found in Salman and Claassen (2018). See for “sustainability” as a separate topic René ten Bos and David Bevan in Painter-Morland and René (2011), pp. 285–305. For the problems a computerized society offers in general Sects. 4.9 and 4.11 of this book.

  74. 74.

    In Netherlands law the notion of ownership is restricted to material objects. Compare article 5.1 Private law: “Eigendom is het meest omvattende recht dat een persoon op een zaak kan hebben” (Ownership is the most encompassing right a person can have to a material object).

  75. 75.

    COM (2018) 237 final, p. 3.

  76. 76.

    GHG: greenhouse gasses, such as CO2 (carbon dioxide).

  77. 77.

    Painter-Morland and René (2011), p. 285 ff.

  78. 78.

    Further observations on “awareness” are offered in Sects. 3.6 and 3.7.

  79. 79.

    In Sect. 2.1. See further on order Sect. 5.2.

  80. 80.

    As distinguished from more institutional “aims and ideals” as mentioned by Waldron and referred to in Sect. 2.6.

  81. 81.

    See for the connection between law and the vita activa Sect. 1.3.

  82. 82.

    See more extensively on dialogue and discussion Sect. 4.5.

  83. 83.

    Section 2.5.

  84. 84.

    Section 2.3.

  85. 85.

    Section 2.2.

  86. 86.

    Section 3.6.

  87. 87.

    Section 1.3.

  88. 88.

    See Rawls (1971), heading of chapter 1, and Rawls (2001).

  89. 89.

    In German: “bildende Kraft.” In Dutch classic philosophy: “vormkracht.”

  90. 90.

    See Sect. 3.2 hereafter.

  91. 91.

    Section 3.12.

  92. 92.

    See further on this: Sects. 4.4 and 4.5.

  93. 93.

    See Sect. 2.4 above.

  94. 94.

    An expression I found in Ricoeur (2000), p. XI. See also p. XIII: “The virtue of justice is based on a relation of distance from the other … .”

  95. 95.

    See further on law and rationality: Sect. 3.12.

  96. 96.

    Unger (1975), p. 89.

  97. 97.

    Section 4.5, near the end.

References

  • Arendt H (1951) The origins of totalitarianism. Schocken Books, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Arendt H (1998) The human condition, Original edition, 2nd edn. Chicago Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Aristotle-Oswald (1999) Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics (trans: Oswald M). Prentice Hall

    Google Scholar 

  • Aristotle-Thomson (2004) Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics (trans: Thomson JAK). Penguin Classics, further revised edition

    Google Scholar 

  • Comey J (2018) A higher loyalty. Flatiron Books, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooter R, Ulen T (2016) Law and economics, 6th edn. Pearson (Addison-Wesley)

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferguson N (2017) The square and the tower. Alan Lane

    Google Scholar 

  • Haferkamp H-P (2015) Bona fides, good faith, aequitas and politics in 20th century Germany. In: Aequitas, Équité, Equity. Actes de colloque. Faculté de droit et de science politique de Montpellier, Montpellier, pp 75–96

    Google Scholar 

  • Hol AM (2005) Adjudication in the public realm. An analysis based on the work of Hanna Arendt. Utrecht Law Rev, December 2005

    Google Scholar 

  • Machiavelli N (1513) The prince. In: Skinner Q, Price R (eds) Cambridge University Press, 3rd printing 2017. Original Italian title: Il Principe

    Google Scholar 

  • Painter-Morland M, René TB (2011) Business ethics and continental philosophy. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Rawls J (1971) A theory of justice, Revised edn. The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Rawls J (2001) Justice as fairness, a restatement. The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Rawls J (2005) Political liberalism, expanded edn. Columbia University Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Ricoeur P (2000) The just (trans: Pellauer D). University of Chicago Press. ‘Le juste’ is the title of the original publication in French, Éditions Esprit, 1995

    Google Scholar 

  • Ricoeur P (2005) Le juste, la justice et son échec, L’Herne, Paris

    Google Scholar 

  • Salman YA, Claassen R (2018) From ownership to access. A philosophical perspective on the rise of access-based consumption. In: Ars Aequi 2018, afl. 07/08, pp 566–576

    Google Scholar 

  • Sen A (2009) The idea of justice. Allen Lane

    Google Scholar 

  • Tamanaha BZ (2004) On the rule of law. Cambridge University Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Tamanaha BZ (2010) Beyond the FORMALIST-REALIST divide. Princeton University Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Tamanaha BZ (2017) A realistic theory of law. Cambridge University Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Unger RM (1975) Knowledge and politics. NY Free Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Schilfgaarde P (2008) Law-linked justice and existence-linked justice. Ratio Juris 21(1):125–149

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Schilfgaarde P (2016) Peter van Schilfgaarde, De redelijkheid en billijkheid in het ondernemingsecht. Kluwer. No translation available

    Google Scholar 

  • von Eschenbach W (1967) Parzival, eine Auswahl, Reclam, Stuttgart, 1967. Original text written around 1200

    Google Scholar 

  • Waldron J (1999) Law and disagreement. Clarendon Press, Oxford

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Waldron J (2016) Political political theory, essays on institutions. Harvard University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Wolff M (2018) Fire and Fury, inside the Trump White House. Henry Holt and Company, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Zwalve W (2015) The equity phenomenon. In: Aequitas, Équité, Equity. Actes de colloque, Faculté de droit et de science politique de Montpellier, Montpellier, pp 31–40

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. The Hague, The Netherlands

    Peter van Schilfgaarde

Authors
  1. Peter van Schilfgaarde
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

van Schilfgaarde, P. (2019). The Rule of Law. In: Law and Life. Why Law?. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-01848-1_2

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-01848-1_2

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-01847-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-01848-1

  • eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation