The Folk Concept of Law: Law Is Intrinsically Moral

References

• Atiq, E.H. 2020. There Are No Easy Counterexamples to Legal Anti-Positivism, Journal of Ethics and Social Philosophy 17/1: 1–26.
   Google Scholar
• Augustine 395 (1993). On Free Choice of the Will, trans. T. Williams, Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Austin, J. 1832. The Province of Jurisprudence Determined, London: John Murray.
   Google Scholar
• Aquinas, T. 1269 (1993). The Treatise on Law:(Summa Theologiae, I-II; qq. 90–97), trans. R.J. Henle, Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bix, B. 2010. Natural Law Theory, in A Companion to Philosophy of Law and Legal Theory, 2^nd edn, ed. D. Patterson, Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell: 211–27.
   Google Scholar
• Chomsky, N. 1957. Syntactic Structures, The Hague: Mouton.
   Google Scholar
• Cowart, W. 1997. Experimental Syntax. Applying Objective Methods to Sentence Judgments, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
   Google Scholar
• D’Amato, A. 1990. Pragmatic Indeterminacy, Northwestern University Law Review 85/1: 148–89.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Del Pinal, G. and K. Reuter 2017. Dual Character Concepts in Social Cognition: Commitments and the Normative Dimension of Conceptual Representation, Cognitive Science 41/S3: 477–501.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Devitt, M. 2011. Experimental Semantics, Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 82/2: 418–35.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Donelson, R. and I.R. Hannikainen 2020. Fuller and the Folk: The Inner Morality of Law Revisited, in Oxford Studies in Experimental Philosophy, Vol. 3, ed. T. Lombrozo, J. Knobe, and S. Nichols, Oxford: Oxford University Press: 6–28.
   Google Scholar
• Dworkin, R. 1978. Taking Rights Seriously, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Dworkin, R. 1986. Law's Empire, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Dworkin, R. 2002. Sovereign Virtue: The Theory and Practice of Equality, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Enoch, D. and K. Toh 2013. Legal as a Thick Concept, in Philosophical Foundations of the Nature of Law, ed. W. Waluchow and S. Sciaraffa, Oxford: Oxford University Press: 257–78.
   Google Scholar
• Finlay. S. and D. Plunkett 2018. Quasi-Expressivism about Statements of Law: A Hartian Theory, in Oxford Studies in Philosophy of Law, Vol. 3, ed. J. Gardner, L. Green, and B. Leiter, Oxford: Oxford University Press: 49–86.
   Google Scholar
• Finnis, J. 1980. Natural Law and Natural Rights, Oxford: Clarendon Press.
   Google Scholar
• Finnis, J. 2020. Natural Law Theories, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, ed. E. N. Zalta, URL= https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/natural-law-theories
   Google Scholar
• Fuller, L.L. 1964. The Morality of Law, New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gardner, J. 2001. Legal Positivism: 5½ Myths, American Journal of Jurisprudence 46/1: 199–227.
   Google Scholar
• Greenberg, M. 2014. The Moral Impact Theory of Law, Yale Law Journal 123/5: 1288–342.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hart, H.L.A. 1961. The Concept of Law, Oxford: Clarendon Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hart, H.L.A. 1979 (2016). The New Challenge to Legal Positivism, Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 36/3: 459–75.
   Google Scholar
• Jackson, F. 1998. From Metaphysics to Ethics: A Defence of Conceptual Analysis, Oxford: Clarendon Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kelsen, H. 1945. General Theory of Law and State, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Knobe, J., S. Prasada, and G.E. Newman 2013. Dual Character Concepts and the Normative Dimension of Conceptual Representation, Cognition 127/2: 242–57.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kunda, Z. 1990. The Case for Motivated Reasoning, Psychological Bulletin 108/3: 480–98.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liao, S., A. Meskin, and J. Knobe 2020. Dual Character Art Concepts, Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 101/1:102–28.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Machery, E. 2012. Expertise and Intuitions About Reference, Theoria: Revista de Teoría, Historia y Fundamentos de la Ciencia 27/1: 37–54.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Machery, E., S. Stich, D. Rose, M. Alai, A. Angelucci, R. Berniūnas, … and J. Zhu 2017. The Gettier Intuition from South America to Asia, Journal of Indian Council of Philosophical Research 34/3: 517–41.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mummolo, J. and E. Peterson 2019. Demand Effects in Survey Experiments: An Empirical Assessment, American Political Science Review 113/2: 517–29.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Murphy, M. 2013. The Explanatory Role of the Weak Natural Law Thesis, in Philosophical Foundations of the Nature of Law, ed. W. Waluchow and S. Sciaraffa, Oxford: Oxford University Press: 3–21.
   Google Scholar
• Murphy, L. 2008. Better to See Law This Way, New York University Law Review 83: 1088–108.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Priel, D. 2019. Evidence-Based Jurisprudence: An Essay for Oxford, Analisi e Diritto 19/2: 87–116.
   Google Scholar
• Radbruch, G. 1946 (2006). Statutory Lawlessness and Supra-Statutory Law, trans. B. Litschewski Paulson and S.L. Paulson, Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 26/1: 1–11.
   Google Scholar
• Raz, J. 1994. Ethics in the Public Domain: Essays in the Morality of Law and Politics, Oxford: Clarendon Press.
   Google Scholar
• Raz, J. 1999. Practical Reason and Norms, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Reuter, K. 2019. Dual Character Concepts, Philosophy Compass 14/1: e125571: 1–10.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shapiro, S.J. 2011. Legality, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Struchiner, N., I. Hannikainen, and G. Almeida 2020. An Experimental Guide to Vehicles in the Park, Judgment and Decision Making 15/3: 312–29.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sytsma, J., and J. Livengood. 2016. The Theory and Practice of Experimental Philosophy, Peterborough: Broadview Press.
   Google Scholar
• Tobia, K.P., G.E. Newman, and J. Knobe 2020. Water Is and Is Not H2O, Mind & Language 35/2: 183–208.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weinberg, J.M., S. Nichols, and S. Stich 2001. Normativity and Epistemic Intuitions, Philosophical Topics 29/1–2: 429–60.
   Google Scholar
• Williams, B. 1985. Ethics and the Limits of Philosophy, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Williamson, T. 2011. Philosophical Expertise and the Burden of Proof, Metaphilosophy 42/3: 215–29.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar