Since the reform and opening up，my country’s bet365 champions league research has a relatively obvious feature，That is, departmental bet365 champions league studies follow the example of Germany，English and American, masters of theoretical law。Combining the evolution of contemporary British and American bet365 champions league philosophy，Refining the basic issues，It is an important task before our country’s theoretical bet365 champions league practitioners。Contemporary British and American bet365 champions league philosophy has a clearer starting point，That is, Hart's "The Concept of Law" published in 1961。This book systematically cleans up the tradition of bet365 champions league philosophy since Austin，And established the basic form of contemporary bet365 champions league philosophy research。After the publication of Dworkin's famous article "Regular Patterns I" (1965)，The bet365 champions league positivist camp represented by Hart launched a long debate with Dworkin，Almost all the development of contemporary British and American bet365 champions league philosophy can be classified under the label of "Hart-Dworkin Controversy"。

The issue of the boundary between law and morality

Regardless of the standard narrative in textbooks，Still in a large number of second-hand literature，The Hart-Dworkin debate centers on issues of principle，The main text basis is "Rule Mode I"。In this article，Dworkin summarizes the bet365 champions league positivism thought represented by Hart into three propositions: First，The law of a community is a set of specific rules，Their bet365 champions league identity is confirmed by the manner in which they are adopted or developed，without considering the quality of its content。Second，Effective bet365 champions league rules exhaust the law，So if a case is not covered by such rules，Judges and other officials must exercise discretion，It means beyond the law，Create new laws or supplement old laws based on extra-bet365 champions league standards。Third，To say that someone has a bet365 champions league obligation is to say that his case is governed by valid bet365 champions league rules，If such bet365 champions league rules do not exist，Then he has no bet365 champions league obligation。

Through the detailed portrayal of difficult cases，Dworkin gave tit-for-tat responses to these three propositions: First，Law includes principles in addition to rules；Second，There is no discretion in the strong sense，On a certain issue，Officials are not bound by the standards set by the relevant authorities at all；Third，The third proposition of bet365 champions league positivism - there is no bet365 champions league obligation when there are no effective bet365 champions league rules - is based on the first proposition，After negating the first proposition，Of course this proposition cannot be established。

We know，The core of Hart’s bet365 champions league theory is the identification rule。Based on the above analysis，Dworkin’s fatal criticism of Hart seems to be，Except rules，bet365 champions league norms also include moral principles，The bet365 champions league identity of these principles cannot be confirmed by identification rules，Therefore Hart’s analysis of law fails。More generally，The genealogical test method of bet365 champions league positivism has failed because of this。This is the common interpretation of Dworkin’s early theory。Accordingly，The bet365 champions league positivism camp has developed two theoretical schemes: inclusive positivism and exclusive positivism，Attempt to respond to Dworkin。In "The Concept of Law" Second Edition Postscript (1994)，can be considered，Hart adopted inclusive positivism as his response。

　　Metatheoretical differences in bet365 champions league philosophy

Although bet365 champions league positivists believe，I have successfully responded to Dworkin’s principle-based challenge，But Dworkin himself thinks，This response is superficial，Is entangled in irrelevant taxonomic issues，Rather than the normative issues he is concerned about。In fact，As early as 1972 in the article "Rule Pattern II"，He has made it clear，The key is not whether the law contains principles；What he really wants to say is，The bet365 champions league identification process cannot be independent of political and moral factors，Completely formalized；The reason why he pays attention to principles，Just because principles provide justification for bet365 champions league propositions。

After the publication of "bet365 champions league Empire" (1986)，Dworkin’s full picture of bet365 champions league philosophy。At the same time，Criticisms of Dworkin，Hart systematically clarified his theoretical positioning in the postscript to the second edition of "The Concept of Law"。Therefore，The debate between Dworkin and bet365 champions league positivists enters a more abstract level。This does not mean that relevant discussions have made substantial progress，Quite the opposite，The confrontation between the two sides at this time is not as targeted as the previous stage。After the publication of "bet365 champions league Empire"，The bet365 champions league positivist camp is increasingly aware that，Dworkin’s challenge is extremely fundamental，Cannot be dismissed easily。For example, Shapiro frankly admitted，bet365 champions league positivists have yet to provide an effective response to "bet365 champions league Empire"。It can be said，Dworkin’s challenge goes beyond what traditional issues within bet365 champions league philosophy can accommodate，He is committed to proposing a new picture of bet365 champions league philosophy，So his criticism is to draw out the fire under the cauldron。So，The discussion of bet365 champions league philosophy since the 1990s has become increasingly metatheoretical，Relevant scholars no longer dwell too much on specific bet365 champions league philosophy issues，They realized that their differences were too deep，What should be studied in bet365 champions league philosophy、There is a lack of basic consensus on prerequisite issues such as how to conduct research。

　　Understanding bet365 champions league Normativity: Toward a Practical Philosophy

Don’t compete on specific subject issues，Reflect on the subject itself，This type of phenomenon indicates，Contemporary British and American bet365 champions league philosophy has fallen into fundamental confusion and even crisis，Meaning that the normal paradigm has been shaken，The new research paradigm has not yet been established。But in the past ten years，The British and American bet365 champions league philosophy circles have gradually downplayed the Hart-Dworkin dispute，Having a clearer development direction，Ma Mo、Shapiro、The works of a new generation of scholars such as Greenberg are quite clear-cut.、Fresh style that goes straight to the core。Find out the key points，Recent researchers have become more and more aware of it，Many issues in the field of bet365 champions league philosophy must still be returned to bet365 champions league philosophy、Political Philosophy、Moral philosophy and other common components，Reason for action、Core concepts such as normativity are developed within the framework of contemporary practical philosophy。

From the perspective of theoretical resources，The Hart-Dworkin debate has a strong color of language philosophy。For example，"The Concept of Law" is generally considered to be the fruit of ordinary language philosophy in the field of law；Dworkin’s theory also starts from the perspective of language philosophy，Using the two theoretical tools of "semantic thorn" and "explanatory concept"，Criticizing old theories、Propose a new theory。In a nutshell，In this long debate，The development results of the philosophy of language will always quickly spread to the field of bet365 champions league philosophy，bet365 champions league philosophers have also put forward some original views on the philosophy of language。But recently，New theories in the field of bet365 champions league philosophy are often in the philosophy of action、Produced under the influence of ethics。For example，Shapiro’s planning theory is deeply indebted to Bratman’s relevant discussions；Ethicist Zhang Meilu took over the Oxford Jurisprudence Chair, which has the highest status in bet365 champions league philosophy in 2017，An interesting contrast to Hart, who became Oxford Chair Professor of Jurisprudence as a philosopher of language more than half a century ago。

As part of practical philosophy，The fundamental question that bet365 champions league philosophy needs to answer is how to understand the normativity of law。Simple appeal to facts cannot solve our confusion on bet365 champions league normative issues。The root of this confusion is，Although the law is a norm，But it has a strong factual aspect。The difficulty in answering the question "What is law?" lies in coordinating the normative and factual aspects of law。

The highlighting of normative issues helps to clarify the moral concerns behind discussions in bet365 champions league philosophy、Political stance。bet365 champions league philosophy is essentially political philosophy、Part of moral philosophy，Only within the framework of practical philosophy，Many issues require thorough discussion。Such an open theoretical stance also helps contemporary British and American bet365 champions league philosophy get out of the narrow professional circle，Enter effective dialogue with other academic schools，And provide specific responses to pressing issues in real society。

(Author’s affiliation: School of Philosophy and Law, Shanghai Normal University)