What question did this study set out to answer?

The aim is to redefine the foundation of legal philosophy by critiquing the Kantian categorical imperative and proposing a new understanding of normativity.

June 6, 2026Open Access

An Alternative Path in the Philosophy of Law

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

The aim is to redefine the foundation of legal philosophy by critiquing the Kantian categorical imperative and proposing a new understanding of normativity.
Reconstruct theoretical frameworks by examining Kant's categorical imperative.
Utilize Weber's typology of social action and Fichte's insights on intersubjectivity to present a new foundation for law.
Analyze the distinctions between nomos and lex to describe law's normative status.
Demonstrates that the categorical imperative is an illusion based on flawed reasoning.
Establishes law as a constitutive hypothetical imperative dependent on intersubjective conditions.
Critiques legal positivism for its reduction of law to social convention, re-defining law's normativity as a self-commitment.

Discussion

No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.

Implication

Critiques the Kantian view of normativity in law, highlighting intersubjective foundations and implications.

Cite This Study

Tianle Han (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a23bcab71a5da9775e77cb2 https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.20543762

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

An Alternative Path in the Philosophy of Law

Key Points

Discussion

Implication

Cite This Study

An Alternative Path in the Philosophy of Law

Key Points

Discussion

Implication

Cite This Study

Keep reading

Keep reading