The Inclusive-exclusive Legal Positivism debate
an introduction
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.36704/inovajur.v4i2.10221Keywords:
Philosophy of Law, Legal Positivism, Theoretical apporachesAbstract
The debate between inclusive and exclusive legal positivism represents one of the most significant theoretical divides in contemporary legal philosophy. At its core, this scholarly discourse examines the fundamental relationship between law and morality, particularly whether moral criteria can function as conditions of legal validity. This debate emerged primarily as a response to Ronald Dworkin's critique of H.L.A. Hart's legal positivism evolved into two distinct theoretical positions with substantively different approaches to understanding the nature of law. This literature review examines the historical origins of this debate, contrasts the main theses and arguments of both theoretical camps, and analyzes the current state of scholarly discourse on this important philosophical question. Since this discussion is not well debated in the Brazilian context, this paper assumes the task of systematizing the debate’s most significant aspects and presenting them to a national academic audience.
References
AUSTIN, John. The Province of Jurisprudence Determined. Wilfrid E. Rumble (ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995. (Publicado originalmente em 1832).
BIX, Brian H. Patrolling the Boundaries: Inclusive Legal Positivism and the Nature of Jurisprudential Debate. Canadian Journal of Law & Jurisprudence, v. 12, n. 1, p. 17-33, 1999.
COLEMAN, Jules L. Beyond Inclusive Legal Positivism. Ratio Juris, v. 22, n. 3, p. 359-394, 2009.
COLEMAN, Jules L. The Practice of Principle: In defence of a pragmatist approach to Legal Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001.
CULVER, Keith. Leaving the Hart-Dworkin debate. The University of Toronto Law Journal, v. 51, n. 4, p. 367-398, 2001.
DIMOULIS, Dimitri. Positivismo Jurídico: introdução a uma teoria do direito e defesa do pragmatismo jurídico-político. São Paulo: Método, 2006.
DWORKIN, Ronald. Hart's Postscript and the Character of Political Philosophy. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, v. 24, n. 1, p. 1-37, 2004.
DWORKIN, Ronald. Law’s Empire. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1986.
DWORKIN, Ronald. The Model of Rules I. In: DWORKIN, Ronald. Taking rights seriously. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1977.
FLANAGAN, Brian, DE ALMEIDA, Guilherme. Lawful, but not Really. The Dual Character of the Concept of Law. Law and Philosophy, v. 43, p. 507–548, 2024.
GREEN, Leslie; ADAMS, Thomas. "Legal Positivism". In: ZALTA, Edward N. (ed.). Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2019 Edition). Disponível em: https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2019/entries/legal-positivism/ Acesso em: 13 ago. 2025.
HART, Herbert L. A. Positivism and the Separation of Law and Morals. Harvard Law Review, v. 71, n. 4, p. 593–629, 1958.
HART, Herbert L. A. The Concept of Law. 2. ed. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1994.
HIMMA, Kenneth Einar. Final Authority to Bind with Moral Mistakes: On the Explanatory Potential of Inclusive Legal Positivism. Law and Philosophy, v. 24, n. 1, p. 1-45, 2005.
HIMMA, Kenneth Einar. The Logic of Showing Possibility Claims. A Positive Argument for Inclusive Legal Positivism and Moral Grounds of Law. Revus, Journal for Constitutional Theory and Philosophy of Law, n. 23, p. 77–104, 2014.
JIMÉNEZ CANO, Roberto M. Una defensa del positivismo jurídico (excluyente). Isonomía, n. 39, p. 83-126, 2013.
MARMOR, Andrei. Exclusive Legal Positivism. In: COLEMAN, Jules L.; HIMMA, Kenneth E.; SHAPIRO, Scott J. (eds.). The Oxford Handbook of Jurisprudence and Philosophy of Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004. p. 104-124.
MORESO, José Juan. In defense of inclusive legal positivism. Diritto & questioni pubbliche, v. 1, p. 99-119, 2001.
MORESO, José Juan. Positivismo jurídico contemporáneo. In: FABRA ZAMORA, Jorge Luis; NUÑEZ VAQUERO, Álvaro. Enciclopedia de filosofía y teoría del derecho. México: UNAM, 2015, v. 1, p. 177-206.
ORMELESI, Vinicius Fernandes. Princípios jurídicos e realidade normativa. Revista de Estudos Jurídicos da UNESP, Franca, v. 16, n. 23, p. 393-413, 2012.
PRIEL, Dan. Farewell to the Exclusive–Inclusive Debate. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, v. 25, n. 4, p. 675–696, 2005.
RAZ, Joseph. Practical Reason and Norms. New York: Oxford University Press, 1999.
RAZ, Joseph. The Authority of Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009. (Publicado originalmente em 1979).
SHAPIRO, Scott J. The Hart-Dworkin Debate: a short guide for the perplexed. March 5, 2007. Disponível em: https://ssrn.com/abstract=968657 Acesso em: 11 fev. 2023.
SHAPIRO, Scott J. Was Inclusive Legal Positivism Founded on a Mistake? Ratio Juris, v. 22, n. 3, p. 326-338, 2009.
SOARES, Fabiana de Menezes; MACIEL, Caroline Stéphanie Francis dos Santos. O debate entre Hart e Dworkin: a controvérsia acerca da existência de divergências teóricas sobre o direito. Revista da Faculdade de Direito da UFMG, n. 70, p. 307-332, jan.-jun. 2017.
STAVROPOULOS, Nicos. The Debate that never was. Harvard Law Review, v. 130, p. 2082-2095, 2016.
VAN DER BURG, Wibren. Essentially ambiguous concepts and the Fuller-Hart-Dworkin debate. Archiv für Rechts- und Sozialphilosophie, v. 95, n. 3, p. 305-326, 2009.
WALUCHOW, Wilfrid J. Inclusive Legal Positivism. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1994.
WALUCHOW, Wilfrid J. Authority and the practical difference thesis: A defense of inclusive legal positivism. Legal Theory, v. 6, n. 1, p. 45-81, 2000.
WOODBURY-SMITH, Kara. Inclusive Legal Positivism. In: SELLERS, Mortimer; KIRSTE, Stephan (eds.). Encyclopedia of the Philosophy of Law and Social Philosophy. Dordrecht: Springer, 2018. p. 1-7.
