A core topic of the theory of law is to explain the standardization of the law，That is how people's behavior choices are limited and guided by law。The 20th Century Analysis Law of the Philosophy Collection、The core member of the daily language school of Oxford Hart (H. L. A. Hart) specifically explained this issue in the book "Concept of Law"。He proposed "Accepting Research"，Explain the standardization of the law through the inherent acceptance of the recognition rules in the legal system。For decades，The theorists start the argument from different angles around this view，The main line of analysis philosophy has been formed。But，In these arguments, there is a misunderstanding of the theoretical nature of the Hart law。To clarify this，This article proposes a ideological context that has not been discussed in the academic community，That is, Hart's reference to Rudolf Carnap，Through comparison、Show the consistency of two demonstrations in many aspects，Re -understand the nature of the theory of Hart Law。

　　bet365 Play online games

Hart defines legal as a social rule。As a social rule，The law proposes to people about how to think about how to think、Normal requirements of judgment and acting，Legal practice is therefore a social rules practice，Its existence depends on people to accept the law as the basis for acting，Form a set of fixed behavior mode。For example，A through learning traffic regulations，I learned "Red Light Press、Green Light Strip "requirements，and use this as a guidance for driving。Hart calls the internal perspective of this way of thinking，That is, people's acceptance and voluntary obey of bet365 live casino games the law。There is still an external perspective that does not accept the law in social life，This kind of people treat the law with the attitude of avoiding harm，Choose not illegal when facing the deterrent of punishment。But，Acting the law to the acceptance of people's acceptance and the social practice model formed will lead to a problem: Can people who do not accept the law escape the obligation to the law? This involves another important element in acceptance of the argument。

According to Hart's point of view，The object of acceptance is not any specific legal rules that guide specific behaviors，but a "recognition rule" commonly followed by society。Acknowledge the rules are the ultimate judgment criteria for what law is not the law，Help people from morality、Different specifications such as sports rules or industry standards are distinguished。Acknowledging the rules presented in a variety of forms in the usual way of legal identification。It is more common in the constitutional law in the national law country，For example, Article 58 of the Constitution in my country，Let people know that only the rules formulated by the National People's Congress and its Standing Committee is the law。In ordinary French families, it is common in judicial habits，For example, British judges generally regard the rules passed by the parliament and the court's jurisprudence as law。Acknowledging the rules are the abstraction of Hart for a general social behavior model，It is used to explain how people identify the law in life。As long as there is enough、The qualified social members accepted the recognition rules，Make a social practice model based on legal acting，We can advocate "red light stop、Green Lights Walk ", the existence of the legal obligation。

Accepting itself is a psychology，Accepting object bet365 Play online games is to recognize rules，The product of the psychological activity accepting the rules of recognition is the internal perspective of the law，The association between these three elements is the inherent logic of Hart's argumentation。But，With the deepening of the academic circles of the argumentation of the academic community，People gradually realize such a problem: the rule of recognition as a convention is a social facts，Accepting is a psychological fact，Both facts belong to the category of facts。Critics so point out，Internal perspective can only answer the facts of the rules that people actually follow in society，And the theory of French theory responds to how we should do what you should do，This involves the normative problem of recognizing the rules itself。Hart's main theoretical opponent Davkin and Finais have made trouble，Criticism Hart has the foundation on the truth of social psychology，Violation of the principles of Hume, two points of facts and Ying Ryo。But，This criticism contains misunderstandings about the theoretical nature of Hart Law。To clarify this problem，Need to associate Hart with an important philosophy demonstration method in the theoretical methodology at the level of theoretical methodology，This is the Karnap language framework demonstration。

　　The existence of language framework and abstract object

There is a controversy about whether mathematical objects have the actual nature of mathematics。We know，Numbers and numbers are the difference between the latter as the symbolization of the former。minimum positive integer can be used as Arabic numerals "1" on paper，You can also be printed in the English "One"，You can also read it in Chinese。As a concrete object，Digitals always get extension in a certain time and physical space。Comparison of comparison，bet365 best casino games Number itself is an abstract object without time and space ductility，Its existence does not depend on any symbol symbol。The existence of abstract objects has always been an important theoretical issue。Someone thinks，The actual nature of admitting the ontology of abstract objects will bring epistemological problems。If the number is an abstract object，It is difficult for us，It is difficult to explain how we get knowledge about these objects。But in reality, we do have a lot of knowledge about numbers，So according to the reasoning reasoning，We better restore abstract objects into the existence of non -abstract objects，To avoid the problem of epistemology。Some thesexes point out，Natural science theory cannot leave the existence of numbers and carry out work。For example，In physics，Measure the movement rate of an object is inseparable from help。The best theoretical description of the number is to affirm its body reality。To cope with this problem，Calnap proposed a unique instructions for abstract objects in the early 1950s，The words used by us when discussing some abstract objects are used as a set of depictions、Interpretation of the language framework related to these abstract objects in the external world。

Take the arithmetic system as an example，Establish the smallest natural number、Piso arithmetic laws such as the principle and induction principle of the number and induction are the basic rules，We will get a set of language framework for arithmetic，And can determine which entities exist in the framework based on this framework。Calnap calls this problem as an internal problem。and the problem of the legitimacy of Piano Law，Actually equivalent to asking why should I accept this language framework。Calnap said these problems bet365 live casino games are external problems。External problems are not arithmetic problems，but the philosophical problem about arithmetic itself。The arithmetic rule can be self -proven inside the arithmetic system，but it cannot surpass the system to do external certificates，External issues cannot get recognition answers inside the framework。Calnap ’s response strategy of external problems is the practicality of resorting to the language framework。The legitimacy of the language framework depends on whether it can provide a set of ideas to explain related phenomena，To help people understand the world。This is here，Even if the abstract object is real in the body，As long as the language framework can be self -consistent，We also have enough practical reasons to discuss abstract objects。

　　Acknowledge the rules as a language framework for understanding legal practice

According to the aforementioned，The function of acknowledging the rules is whether a social rules can be regarded as the ultimate judgment standard。Converted to Karnap's words，is to determine which entities (social rules) are determined according to the basic rules (laws) of the language framework (law).。With a framework，When people face any rules to act，You can get a certain answer from the internal perspective of the framework。Hart is defined in this sense to define the normativeness of the law，It can be called internal or local normative。External questioning of legitimate reason to accept the rules of recognition，Not a legal issue，but questions about law，Unable to make awareness answer inside the frame。This idea is particularly clear in Hart that the rules are recognized by the Rimi ruler。According to Hart，The existence of the Rice ruler specifies how long one meter is，What is the definition bet365 best casino games of what is "one meter"。When this definition is accepted，The public institutional system in the unit of rice is formed，People can judge which objects are one meter in the internal perspective of the system。But the rice original ruler does not answer why it is acceptable to accept the external problems of publicity rather than the British system，Just as the recognition rules do not answer why you accept the recognition rules。Actually，Regardless of weight、Law is still arithmetic，Basic rules of the framework cannot prove itself。

As for why people accept an external questioning of a set of language frameworks，Calnap pointed out，People's acceptance of arithmetic is probably unconsciously completed in the early years，Choose after irrational thinking。Hart talks about why when accepting the recognition rules，also denied the necessity of recognition of moral reasons，and specifically mentioned the non -recognition acceptance of "unintentional psychology of the internal province"。Both theorists only described the possible process of accepting at the experience level，but not proof into acceptance。Hart pointed out for this，His method theory is interpretation，It aims to explain how people identify and do it based on law，As for accepting the proof of itself，That is the task of moral and political philosophy。Critics misunderstand this，Only thinks that Hart's explanation of the norms is incomplete。Actually，As Karnap distinguishes internal and external problems，It is impossible for any theory to explain everything，Frame the boundary of the theory can carry out research work more targeted。

Calnap proposed a language framework demonstration in 1950，Earlier than "Concept of Law" 11 years。As a philosophy master of that era，The logic Bet365 app download empirical theory he represents has a deep influence on Hart's Oxford daily linguistic school。other，Whether it is the term selection、Research logic or theoretical purpose，The height consistency of the two shows Hart's important reference on Calnap。So，Back to Calnipp's language framework to re -examine and accept the argument，helps us more accurately grasp the nature of the theory of Hart law。

　(Author Unit: School of Law of Renmin University of China)