| Phi 213 Spring 2014 |
|
(Site navigation is not working.) |
The final section is the closest thing in “Hard Cases” to chs. 7-9 of Hart; that is, it is the place where Dworkin addresses possible criticisms of his account of adjudication. Dworkin provides no subsections here, but the following is one way of dividing this material into parts.
• Pp. 1101-1103. This is a preliminary discussion of two distinctions, one between the descriptive and the normative aspect of the rights thesis and the other between two ways of relying on one’s convictions.
• Pp. 1103-1105. Here we meet a new character, Herbert (who has the same first name as H. L. A. Hart). Dworkin holds Herbert’s method of adjudication to be open to criticisms which may seem to apply to Hercules but really do not.
• Pp. 1105-1107. Dworkin considers and rejects an objection resting on the potentially controversial character of Hercules’ decisions. Notice the summary on pp. 1107.
• Pp. 1107-1109. Two final sorts of objection to Hercules are considered here: one is that he should defer to popular opinion and the other is that his method of adjudication is inappropriate for merely human judges. Notice, in Dworkin’s response to each objection, the role that is played by his view that judges confirm or deny rights.
Of course, think about the objections Dworkin considers and his replies to them, but this is also a good time to think of any objections of your own to Dworkin’s position.