What Is Wrong with Legal Realism?

Abstract

Shapiro’s book Legalidad engages in a difficult and exiting philosophical task: giving an account of what law is and of why it is worth having. His “Planning Theory of Law” addresses the first issue in terms of the so-called “Social Facts” thesis and the second in terms of the “Moral Aim” thesis: law is determined by social facts alone, but it has a moral point, for the aim of legal activity is to remedy some moral deficiencies. Twentieth-century jurisprudential schools divided on such topics. Among such schools, Shapiro rejects the realist view because it leaves out of the picture the internal point of view. However, many realist claims were about legal knowledge, not about legal normativity. The paper addresses this point recalling also the debate between Hart and Ross.