Foto 1 di 1

Foto di catalogo

Law, Liberty, and Morality (Harry Camp Lectures at Stanford University) [Paper.. - Foto 1 di 1

Law, Liberty, and Morality by H. L. A. Hart (1963, Trade Paperback)

honest2023 (307)

99,3% di feedback positivi

Prezzo:

US $7,28

CircaEUR 6,26

+ $25,47 di spese di spedizione

Consegna prevista mer 3 dic - mer 24 dic

Restituzioni:

Restituzioni entro 30 giorni. Le spese di spedizione del reso sono a carico dell'acquirente..

Condizione:

Nuovo

Law, Liberty, and Morality (Harry Camp Lectures at Stanford University) [Paperback] Hart, H. L. A. Publisher: Stanford University Press. Release Date: 2063-06-01.

Informazioni su questo prodotto

Product Identifiers

PublisherStanford University Press

ISBN-100804701547

ISBN-139780804701549

eBay Product ID (ePID)955469

Product Key Features

Number of Pages96 Pages

LanguageEnglish

Publication NameLaw, Liberty, and Morality

Publication Year1963

SubjectEthics & Professional Responsibility, General

TypeTextbook

AuthorH. L. A. Hart

Subject AreaLaw, Political Science

FormatTrade Paperback

Dimensions

Item Height0.2 in

Item Weight4.5 Oz

Item Length8.5 in

Item Width5.5 in

Additional Product Features

Intended AudienceScholarly & Professional

LCCN62-018743

Dewey Decimal340.1

SynopsisThis incisive book deals with the use of the criminal law to enforce morality, in particular sexual morality, a subject of particular interest and importance since the publication of the Wolfenden Report in 1957. Professor Hart first considers John Stuart Mill's famous declaration: "The only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community is to prevent harm to others." During the last hundred years this doctrine has twice been sharply challenged by two great lawyers: Sir James Fitzjames Stephen, the great Victorian judge and historian of the common law, and Lord Devlin, who both argue that the use of the criminal law to enforce morality is justified. The author examines their arguments in some detail, and sets out to demonstrate that they fail to recognize distinction of vital importance for legal and political theory, and that they espouse a conception of the function of legal punishment that few would now share.