Vinicius Fernandes Ormelesi (Minas Gerais State University) has posted The Inclusive-Exclusive Legal Positivism Debate: A Very Short Introduction on SSRN. Here is the abstract:
The debate between inclusive and exclusive legal positivism represents one of the most significant theoretical divides in contemporary legal philosophy. At its core, this scholarly discourse examines the fundamental relationship between law and morality, particularly whether moral criteria can function as conditions for legal validity. This debate emerged primarily as a response to Ronald Dworkin’s critique of H.L.A. Hart’s legal positivism evolved into two distinct theoretical positions with substantively different approaches to understanding the nature of law. This literature review examines the historical origins of this debate, contrasts the main theses and arguments of both theoretical camps, and analyzes the current state of scholarly discourse on this important philosophical question. Even if this discussion is well known in the Anglo-American context, this paper assumes the task of systematizing the debate’s most significant aspects and presenting them as a short guide to non-specialists.
Recommended. A very good introduction to this important, but now neglected, debate in the philosophy of law. Essential reading for anyone who is not familiar with this debate with an interest in legal theory.