LAW, TRUTH, AND REASON Law and Philosophy Library VOLUME 97 Series Editors: FRANCISCO J. LAPORTA, Department of Law, Autonomous University of Madrid, Spain FREDERICK SCHAUER, School of Law, University of Virginia, U.S.A. TORBEN SPAAK, Uppsala University, Sweden Former Series Editors: AULIS AARNIO, MICHAEL D. BAYLES†, CONRAD D. JOHNSON†, ALAN MABE, ALEKSANDER PECZENIK† Editorial Advisory Board: AULIS AARNIO, Secretary General of the Tampere Club, Finland HUMBERTO ÁVILA, Federal University of South Brazil, Brazil ZENON BANKOWSKI, Centre for Law and Society, University of Edinburgh, United Kingdom PAOLO COMANDUCCI, University of Genoa, Italy HUGH CORDER, University of Cape Town, South Africa DAVID DYZENHAUS, University of Toronto, Canada ERNESTO GARZÓN VALDÉS, Institut für Politikwissenschaft, Johannes Gutenberg Universitat, Mainz, Germany RICCARDO GUASTINI, University of Genoa, Italy JOHN KLEINIG, Department of Law, Police Science and Criminal Justice Administration, John Jay College of Criminal Justice, City University of New York, U.S.A. PATRICIA MINDUS, Università Degli Studi di Torino, Italy YASUTOMO MORIGIWA, Nagoya University, Japan GIOVANNI BATTISTA RATTI, “Juan de la Cierva” Fellow in Law, Faculty of Law, University of Girona, Spain WOJCIECH SADURSKI, European University Institute, Department of Law, Florence, Italy HORACIO SPECTOR, Universidad Torcuato Di Tella, Argentina ROBERT S. SUMMERS, School of Law, Cornell University, U.S.A. MICHEL TROPER, Membre de l’Institut Universitaire de France, France CARL WELLMAN, Department of Philosophy, Washington University, U.S.A. For further volumes: http://www.springer.com/series/6210 LAW, TRUTH, AND REASON A Treatise on Legal Argumentation Raimo Siltala University of Turku, Finland 123 Raimo Siltala Professor in Jurisprudence Faculty of Law Caloniankuja 3 20014 University of Turku raimo.siltala@utu.fi ISSN 1572-4395 ISBN 978-94-007-1871-5 e-ISBN 978-94-007-1872-2 DOI 10.1007/978-94-007-1872-2 Springer Dordrecht Heidelberg London New York Library of Congress Control Number: 2011931967 © Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011 No part of this work may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, microfilming, recording or otherwise, without written permission from the Publisher, with the exception of any material supplied specifically for the purpose of being entered and executed on a computer system, for exclusive use by the purchaser of the work. Printed on acid-free paper Springer is part of Springer Science+Business Media (www.springer.com) Acknowledgments I wish to thank the Faculty of Law at the University of Turku for its open-minded academic atmosphere and for providing me the funding and all the facilities I needed in writing this book. Also, I wish to thank the Faculty of Law at the University of Helsinki for kindly letting me use one of their workrooms during the research process while staying in Helsinki. I wish to thank professor Aulis Aarnio and the late professor Neil MacCormick for initiating me to the path of philosophy and jurisprudence already some years ago. I wish to thank my friends and colleagues at the joint reading circle and researcher seminar that started in 2005 with an analysis of Neil MacCormick’s impressive works on jurisprudence. The project has been active ever since. Together, we have read some of the most prominent works on jurisprudence and legal philos- ophy today, and we even had the privilege of hearing each of the authors in person at the concluding seminar held in Finland: Neil MacCormick (in 2006), Ronald Dworkin (in 2008), and Robert Alexy (in 2010). Now, we are reading John R. Searle’s philosophical works, hoping to have him as our guest of honor in 2012. Of my many friends in the group, I would like to name the ‘Four Musketeers’ here, i.e. Mikko Huuskonen, Matti Kunnas, Max Oker-Blom, and Ari Wirén, without forgetting the others. I wish to thank the Series Editors at Springer for approving my manuscript in the esteemed Law and Philosophy Library. I think I am very fortunate in this, since one of my main sources of inspiration here, i.e. Jerzy Wróblewski’s The Judicial Application of Law, was published in the very same series in 1992, then hosted by Kluwer Academic Publishers. I wish to thank Neil Olivier and Diana Nijenhuijzen at Springer for their prolific mastering of the legal and administrative issues involved. Moreover, I wish to thank Anandhi Bashyam and her team in India for their very skilful editorial and technical work in the process of transforming the manuscript into a book on legal reasoning. Finally, I wish to thank my companion Tuija for her lasting love and passion for a man who all too often vanishes into the unknown of legal philosophy and jurisprudence; our two daughters Venla and Anna for reminding me that there is life outside the university, as well; and my parents Laura and Tatu for their unconditional love, encouragement, and support in all my life. v This is Blank Page Integra vi Contents 1 Introduction ............................... 1 1.1 The Three Ideologies of Judicial Decision-Making by JerzyWróblewski......................... 1 1.2 The Three Situations of Legal Decision-Making by Kaarle Makkonen . ....................... 6 1.3 The Subject Matter of the Treatise: Legal Argumentation, or How to Construct and Read the Law in a Reasoned Manner ...................... 11 1.4 The Concept of a Frame of Legal Analysis . ........ 12 1.5 The Theories of Truth and Legal Analysis ............ 14 1.6 The Semantics of Law: Rudolf Carnap’s Method ofExtensionandIntension.................... 20 2 An Isomorphic Theory of Law: A Relation of Structural Similarity Between the Two Fact-Constellations Compared .... 29 2.1 Kaarle Makkonen on Legal Isomorphism ............ 29 2.2 The Picture Theory of Language in Ludwig Wittgenstein’s Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus,as Read in Light of Erik Stenius’ Wittgenstein’s Tractatus. A Critical Exposition of the Main Lines of Thought ....... 31 2.2.1 The Internal Categorial Structure and the External Configuration Structure of Reality . .... 31 2.2.2 A Legal Fact-Situation as an Analysed Fact-Situation . 36 2.3 The Two Requirements Placed on Legal Isomorphism . .... 41 2.4 The Transition From an Isomorphic Situation to a SituationofSemanticAmbiguity................ 43 2.5 Legal Isomorphism and Institutional Facts ............ 45 2.6 The Semantic Theory of Truth by Alfred Tarski . ........ 47 2.7 A Critical Evaluation of the Isomorphic Theory of Law . .... 48 3 Coherence Theory of Law: Shared Congruence Among Arguments Drawn from the Institutional and Societal Sources of Law ............................. 53 3.1 Truth As Coherence Among the Sentences of a Scientific Theory . ............................ 53 vii viii Contents 3.2 In Search for the Concept of Coherence ............. 55 3.2.1 A Quantitative Approach: “The More/Longer/Greater (...), the More Coherent the Theory” .................. 55 3.2.2 A Qualitative Approach: “That the Law is Structured by a Coherent Set of Principles About Justice and Fairness and Procedural Due Process...” ....................... 60 3.3 The Duhem-Quine Thesis: The Inherently Holistic and Underdetermined Character of a Scientific Theory, andItsImplicationsforLegalAnalysis............. 68 3.4 Towards Partial Coherence in Law . ............. 71 3.5 The Concept of Coherence Redefined . ............. 73 3.6 A Critical Evaluation of the Coherence Theory of Law . .... 77 4 “Between the Evident and the Irrational”: The New Rhetoric and Legal Argumentation Theory ............. 79 4.1 TheVarietiesofPragmatismandtheLaw............ 79 4.2 The Universal Audience as a Subjective Thought Construct of the Speaker by Chaïm Perelman . ........ 81 4.3 The Realm of Rhetoric and the Quest for Value-Cognitivism . 87 4.4 TheNewRhetoricandItsAlternatives.............. 93 5 Philosophical Pragmatism: Law, Judged in Light of Its Social Effects .............................. 97 5.1 “What, In Short, is the Truth’s Cash Value in Experiential Terms?”.............................. 97 5.2 TheLureofPragmatismandtheLaw.............. 102 5.3 “These Doctrines Form a System for Inducing People to Behave Efficiently...”..................... 106 5.4 “Why Efficiency?” and “Is Wealth a Value?” – A Critical Evaluation of the Economic Analysis of Law, with Brief Comments on the Marxist Theory of Law . .... 108 6 Analytical Legal Positivism: Retracing the Original Intentions of the Legislator Under Legal Exegesis .......... 113 6.1 Scientific Positivism Defined . .................. 113 6.2 WhatIsAnalyticalPhilosophy?................. 116 6.3 Legal Positivism Defined . .................. 118 6.4 The Saga of Modern Legal Positivism . ............. 124 6.4.1 AnalyticalLegalPositivism............... 124 6.4.2 Institutional Legal Positivism . ............. 130 6.4.3 ExclusiveandInclusiveLegalPositivism........ 132 6.5 The Unresolvable Dilemma of Kaarlo Tuori’s Critical LegalPositivism......................... 136 Contents ix 6.6 One Step (or Two) Back in History: The Exegetical School of Law (École de l’Exégèse) in France and Belgium in the Nineteenth Century . ............. 138 6.7 ACriticalEvaluationofLegalExegesis............. 141 7 Legal Realism: The Law in Action, Not the Law in Books, As the Subject Matter of Legal Analysis ............... 145 7.1 Philosophical Realism Defined .................. 145 7.2 Legal Realism, American and Scandinavian . ........ 148 7.3 TheLegacyofAmericanLegalRealism............. 151 7.4 The Concept