Lundstedt and his theory of law: the death of morality? 
Study at Lund allowed me to do battle with the evil forces Scandinavian realism, this current of philosophy of law that can be attached quickly to a form of positivism sociological. Writing a thesis on the subject allows me to feed this blog all wondrous substance.
Thus, the warlike Swedes battled for his beliefs, which I mostly read through three books English - Legal Thinking Revisited, Superstition or reality in action for peace? and Law and Fact - which could be summarized in a crusade against the argumentative "method of justice." This method refers to the classical theory of law, at least one dominant in the first half of the twentieth century which is contemporary Lundstedt. It consists, he said, shortly to establish logical relations of cause and effect to the glow of a brilliant legal system efficiency, which is really absurd. He said any attempt to objectification of law is doomed to failure because unscientific. It is illusory to seek to generate dedicated unchangeable standards to regulate the social order, objective, even at the bottom right is about the individual, thereby requiring subjective standards. And the absurdity of the method is confirmed, he says, by judicial practice. Judges are under the direction of equity common law, albeit under a different name to fit the resolution of the dispute with the requirements of society. Otherwise, rigid application of legal frameworks would lack effectiveness. For example, the prohibition is to say the absolute prohibition of consuming and selling alcohol, can not be socially accepted (!) And therefore can not be erected at the normative level.
Instead, it is appropriate to apply what he defines as a method of the welfare of the general welfare if you will. The scientific rigor that must guide legal science must place, empirically, the starting point for its work in the social fact. That's why we criticize such a model terms of practice, it seems difficult to wear in the absolute of such principles. Social aspirations is by definition contingent, one wonders how well an imperative that respect would be to adapt to the rules at all times. To say nothing of the problem of social conflict, because it seems to be a challenge to draw general conclusions from a mass of individuals whose opinions diverge profoundly. Nevertheless, Lundstedt advocated such an approach, encouraging judges are used. And remember that he was himself a Social Democrat parliamentary influence, the Swedish case law could be characterized forever.
to think in moral terms about what is to some extent a political theory, although legalistic in its approach, I realized most striking difference between his realistic skepticism and Kantian theories and neo-Kantian. To go faster, say that the theory of welfare is radically opposed to any moral principle ethereal, cleverly deduced how the metaphysics of morals , these very principles that guide the work of UN agencies, based largely on faith in collective progress. Instead, he opposes the crudity subjective and can not be abstractly exceeded, thereby building the sociology of design. It is not surprising in the sense that these theories play after the Second World War, where Kant and juice naturalism emerged victorious conceptually, we have an impression of old-fashioned.
For freshness, we will dive into the delights of neo-utilitarianism and Rawlsian rich theoretical debates that have occurred since the publication in 1971 of his penetrating Theory of Justice . is decorating its author the article, haut à gauche. A bon entendeur...
