Ronald Dworkin: The Unity of Description and Evaluation
Ronald Dworkin revolutionized legal theory by rejecting the traditional divide between the dry description of norms and their moral evaluation. In his view, law is not merely a collection of dead rules, but a living interpretive practice. The judge ceases to be a mere official and becomes a co-author of the community's narrative. This article explores Dworkin's concept of integrity, which helps us understand why individual rights must serve as trumps in the face of majority interests, and how the ideal of Judge Hercules influences contemporary jurisprudence, including in Poland.
Rules and Principles: Dworkin's Normative Dichotomy
The foundation of Dworkin's thought is the distinction between rules and principles. Rules operate in a binary fashion—"all-or-nothing." If a rule applies, it dictates the outcome; if not, it remains silent. Principles, on the other hand, have a dimension of weight and importance; they do not exclude one another but require weighing in a specific context. Consequently, rights function as trumps, protecting the individual from having their liberty sacrificed on the altar of political utility.
In Polish legal scholarship, these ideas were developed by figures such as Jerzy Wróblewski and Marek Zirk-
Frequently Asked Questions
How do rules differ from principles in Dworkin's theory?
Rules operate in an "all-or-nothing" fashion, meaning that if their premises are met, the decision is conclusive. Principles, on the other hand, have a weighting dimension and require mutual weighing in a specific factual situation.
Who is Judge Hercules and what is his role?
This is the methodological model of a craftsman-judge who undertakes a titanic interpretive effort. His goal is to create a coherent justification for a judgment that combines the history of the institution with the best vision of justice.
What is the metaphor of law as a chain novel?
A judge, like the author of the next chapter of a shared novel, must respect the plot created by his predecessors (the history of law) and continue it in the most coherent and morally valuable way.
What does it mean that rights are “trump cards”?
This means that the fundamental claims of an individual are inviolable and cannot be ignored by the state even in the name of achieving important political goals or the interests of the majority of society.
What are the stages of Dworkin's interpretation of law?
The process includes a pre-interpretation stage (description of the current practice), an interpretation stage (searching for the best moral justification for this practice) and a post-interpretation stage (final formulation of the decision).
Related Questions
Who was Ronald Dworkin, and how did he change the perception of the relationship between description and evaluation in law?
What is the difference between rules and principles in the Dworkinian normative order?
What are “laws as trump cards” and what role do they play in the relationship between the individual and the state?
Who is Judge Hercules, and what steps does he take in adjudicating?
What are the two key requirements of constructivist interpretation: “fit” and “justification”?
What is the metaphor of the “chain story” in the context of the continuity of legal narratives?
How does McLoughlin v. O’Brian illustrate the triumph of principle over the fear of arbitrariness?
How does the “Snail Darter” case demonstrate the Dworkinian understanding of legislative integrity?
Why is Brown v. Board of Education considered a paradigmatic example of integrity?
What is the difference between “foundations of law” and “force of law,” and why is this distinction important?
Tags:Empire of LawRonald Dworkinintegrity of the lawJudge Herculesprinciples and rulesrights as trump cardsconstructive interpretationfit and justificationchain novelcheckerboard lawslegitimization of coercionweighing the rulessemantic biteprocedural fairnessinterpretive attitude
