IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/oxjlsj/v43y2023i1p97-123..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Law, Coercion and Folk Intuitions

Author

Listed:
  • Lucas Miotto
  • Guilherme F C F Almeida
  • Noel Struchiner

Abstract

In discussing whether legal systems are necessarily coercive, legal philosophers usually appeal to thought experiments involving angels or other morally driven beings who need no coercion to organise their social lives. Such appeals have invited criticism. Critics have not only challenged the relevance of such thought experiments to our understanding of legal systems; they have also argued that, contrary to the intuitions of most legal philosophers, the ‘man on the Clapham Omnibus’ would not hold that there is law in a society of angels because the view that law is necessarily coercive ‘enjoys widespread support among laypersons’. This is obviously an empirical claim. Critics, however, never systematically polled the ‘man on the Clapham Omnibus’. We boarded that bus. This article discusses findings from five empirical studies on the relationship between law and coercion.

Suggested Citation

  • Lucas Miotto & Guilherme F C F Almeida & Noel Struchiner, 2023. "Law, Coercion and Folk Intuitions," Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 43(1), pages 97-123.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:oxjlsj:v:43:y:2023:i:1:p:97-123.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/ojls/gqac014
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:oxjlsj:v:43:y:2023:i:1:p:97-123.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/ojls .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.