Can Theories of Meaning and Reference Solve the Problem of Legal Determinacy?

Abstract. A number of important legal theorists have recently argued for metaphysically realist approaches to legal determinacy grounded in particular semantic theories or theories of reference, in particular views of meaning and reference based on the works of Putnam and Kripke. The basic position of these theorists is that questions of legal interpretation and legal determinacy be approached through semantic meaning. However, the role of authority (in the form of lawmaker choice) in law in general and democratic systems in particular require that these realist “solutions” to the problem of legal determinacy be rejected or at least significantly revised.     

Advantages of Foundations in St Kitts

The present article provides a detailed analysis of the advantagesof setting up a foundation in St Kitts.     

Lessons from the Past: Reassessing the Interwar Disciplinary History of International Relations

This article reconstructs the interwar discourse of international relations among American political scientists and seeks to challenge the orthodox view that the scholarship of this period was essentially idealist in nature. It aims to make a contribution to the growing body of literature devoted to examining the institutional history of international relations. My purpose is to demonstrate that the conventional label of idealism that has been attached to the interwar period of international relations scholarship seriously misrepresents the actual character of the conversation that was being directed toward understanding international politics. By carefully reconstructing the internal discourse of the field, many of the field's long forgotten individuals and ideas are brought back to life. The article concludes by highlighting some of the lessons that the interwar discourse offers to the study of international relations today and argues that this period cannot be construed as idealist.     

Language Games: Dialogical Analysis of INF Negotiations

This essay proposes dialogical analysis as a method of modeling political interactions. The method combines the formal theory of dialogical disputation, a family of theories drawn from linguistic pragmatics, and formal proof procedures. By analyzing models of their explicit and implicit contents in context, the method identifies the argumentative thrust of negotiation dialogues and shows systematically how the parties signal intent and commitment to one another. The paper illustrates the method by applying it to superpower interactions in the 1980s INF negotiations. The analysis indicates that American force deployments did not motivate the Soviet retreat from their early insistence on compensation for European missiles. The change in the Soviet position is better attributed to their strategic reconceptualization of the Cold War insecurity dilemma.     

The Beating of Rodney King: The Dynamics of Backfire

The 1991 beating of Rodney King by Los Angeles police provides rich case material in how an attack perceived as unjust can backfire. Drawing on nonviolence theory, an original framework is developed to analyze attacks as potential backfires that are usually, but not always, inhibited. Attackers can use a variety of methods to inhibit backfires, including covering up the attack, devaluing the target, reinterpreting the events, using official channels, and using intimidation and bribery. Writings on the Rodney King beating include evidence on the use of each of these methods. Studying the backfire process offers improved understanding on how to oppose unjust attacks.