Acceso usuarios
Pierluigi Chiassoni
My aim in this paper is arguing for interpretive scepticism from a pragmatics point of view. The argument will proceed in four steps. In the first step, I will lay down the conceptual framework. In the second step, I will make clear what I consider interpretive scepticism and formalism to be. Here, I will contrast scepticism (non-cognicivism) with two varieties of formalism (integral and restricted cognitivism, respectively), and set forth a few criticisms of them. In the third step, I will consider a sophisticated version of restricted cognitivism: the one defended by Andrei Mannor in a series of valuable essays. Mannor makes his case by resorting to philosophy of language. I will argue, however, that philosophy of language, and pragmatics as a substantive part thereof, far from providing support for the restricted form of cognitivism Mannor advocates, suggest, contrariwise, that it should be abandoned. In the fourth , and last, step, I will lay down the outline of a pragmatic interpretivist theory of judicial interpretation.
