Encyclopedia of the Philosophy of Law and Social Philosophy

Living Edition
| Editors: Mortimer Sellers, Stephan Kirste

Law as an Artifact

  • Luka BurazinEmail author
Living reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-6730-0_217-1

Introduction

On a very broad reading, the idea that law is an artifact can be understood in the sense that law is artificial in character. In this sense it roughly means that law is posited or positive law, law understood as the creation of human beings, the product of human actions, and not something occurring naturally. However, a growing interest in the theories of artifacts within general philosophy (analytic metaphysics in particular) at the end of the twentieth and the beginning of the twenty-first century (Lowe 1983; Hilpinen 1992, 1993, 2011; Dipert 1993; Thomasson 2003, 2007, 2009, 2014; Baker 2004, 2006, 2008, 2010; Elder 2007; Houkes and Vermaas 2009; Preston 2009, among others) and social ontological theories (especially Searle 1995, 2010; Tuomela 2002, 2007, 2013) prompted legal philosophers (both legal positivists and natural law theorists) to inquire into the ontological implications of the thesis that law is an artifact, i.e., to explicate, by using the conceptual...

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

References

  1. Baker LR (2004) The ontology of artifacts. Philos Explor 7(2):99–112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Baker LR (2006) On the twofold nature of artefacts: a response to Wybo Houkes and Anthonie Meijers. Stud Hist Philos Sci 37:132–136CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Baker LR (2008) The shrinking difference between artifacts and natural objects. Am Philos Assoc Newsl Philos Comput 07(2):2 http://people.umass.edu/lrb/files/bak08shrM.pdfGoogle Scholar
  4. Baker LR (2010) Shrinking difference – response to replies. Am Philos Assoc Newsl Philos Comput 09(2):3–38 http://people.umass.edu/lrb/files/bak10shr.pdfGoogle Scholar
  5. Burazin L (2015) Practical concepts of law as an artifact kind. Pravni vjesnik 31(3–4):65–75Google Scholar
  6. Burazin L (2016) Can there be an artifact theory of law? Ratio Juris 29(3):385–401CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Burazin L (2018) Legal systems as abstract institutional artifacts. In: Burazin L, Himma KE, Roversi C (eds) Law as an artifact. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 112–135CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Crowe J (2014) Law as an artifact kind. Monash Univ Law Rev 40:737–757Google Scholar
  9. Dipert RR (1993) Artifacts, art works, and agency. Temple University Press, PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
  10. Dworkin R (1998 [1986]) Law’s empire. Hart Publishing, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  11. Ehrenberg KM (2009) Defending the possibility of a neutral functional theory of law. Oxf J Leg Stud 29(1):91–113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Ehrenberg KM (2016) Functions of law. Oxford University Press, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Ehrenberg KM (2018) Law is an institution, an artifact, and a practice. In: Burazin L, Himma KE, Roversi C (eds) Law as an artifact. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 177–191Google Scholar
  14. Elder CL (2007) On the place of artifacts in ontology. In: Margolis E, Laurence S (eds) Creations of the mind. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 33–51Google Scholar
  15. Finnis J (2018) The nature of law. In: Tasioulas J (ed) Cambridge companion to philosophy of law. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  16. Gardner J (2004) The legality of law. Ratio Juris 17(2):168–181CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Green L (2013) The morality in law. In: Duarte d’Almeida L, Edwards J, Dolcetti A (eds) Reading HLA Hart The concept of law. Hart Publishing, Oxford/Portland, pp 177–207Google Scholar
  18. Hilpinen R (1992) On artifacts and works of art. Theoria 58(1):58–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hilpinen R (1993) Authors and artifacts. Proc Aristot Soc New Ser 93:155–178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hilpinen R (2011) Artifact. In: Zalta EN (ed) The Standford encyclopedia of philosophy, Winter 2011 edn. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2011/entries/artifact/
  21. Himma KE (2018) The Conceptual Function of Law: Law, Coercion, and Keeping the Peace. In: Burazin L, Himma KE, Roversi C (eds) Law as an artifact. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 136–159Google Scholar
  22. Houkes W, Vermaas PE (2009) Artefacts in analytic metaphysics. Techné Res Philos Technol 13(2):74–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Leiter B (2011) The demarcation problem in jurisprudence: a new case for scepticism. Oxf J Leg Stud 31(4): 663–677CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Leiter B (2018) Legal positivism about the artifact law: a retrospective assessment. In: Burazin L, Himma KE, Roversi C (eds) Law as an artifact. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 3–28Google Scholar
  25. Lowe EJ (1983) On the identity of artefacts. J Philos 80(4):220–232CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Marmor A (2018) Law, fiction, and reality. In: Burazin L, Himma KE, Roversi C (eds) Law as an artifact. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 44–60Google Scholar
  27. Murphy MC (2015) Two unhappy dilemmas for natural law jurisprudence. Am J Jurisprud 60(2):121–141CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Preston B (2009) Philosophical theories of artefact function. In: Meijers A (ed) Philosophy of technology and engineering sciences. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 213–233CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Priel D (2018) Not all law is an artifact: jurisprudence meets the common law. In: Burazin L, Himma KE, Roversi C (eds) Law as an artifact. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 239–267CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Roversi C (2015) Legal metaphoric artifacts. In: Brożek B, Stelmach J, Kurek Ł (eds) The emergence of normative orders. Copernicus Center Press, Krakow, pp 215–280Google Scholar
  31. Roversi C (2018) On the artifactual – and natural – character of legal institutions. In: Burazin L, Himma KE, Roversi C (eds) Law as an artifact. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 89–111Google Scholar
  32. Schauer F (2012) On the nature of the nature of law. Arch Rechts Sozialphilos 98(4):457–467Google Scholar
  33. Schauer F (2018) Law as a malleable artifact. In: Burazin L, Himma KE, Roversi C (eds) Law as an artifact. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 29–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Searle JR (1995) The construction of social reality. The Free Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  35. Searle JR (2010) Making the social world: the structure of human civilization. Oxford University Press, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Thomasson AL (2003) Realism and human kinds. Philos Phenomenol Res 67(3):580–609CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Thomasson AL (2007) Artifacts and human concepts. In: Margolis E, Laurence S (eds) Creations of the mind. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 52–73Google Scholar
  38. Thomasson AL (2009) Artifacts in metaphysics. In: Meijers AWM (ed) Philosophy of technology and engineering sciences. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 191–212CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Thomasson AL (2014) Public artifacts, intentions, and norms. In: Franssen M, Kroes P, Reydon TAC, Vermaas PE (eds) Artefact kinds. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 45–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Tuomela R (2002) The philosophy of social practices: a collective acceptance view. Cambridge University Press, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Tuomela R (2007) The philosophy of sociality: the shared point of view. Oxford University Press, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Tuomela R (2013) Social ontology: collective intentionality and group agents. Oxford University Press, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Tuzet G (2018) A strange kind of artifact. In: Burazin L, Himma KE, Roversi C (eds) Law as an artifact. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 217–238Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of ZagrebZagrebCroatia

Section editors and affiliations

  • Miodrag Jovanovic
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Theory, Sociology and Philosophy of LawUniversity of Belgrade, Faculty of LawBelgradeSerbia