Causality and imputation in Hans Kelsen
a critique of modern civilizational progress
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.12662/2447-6641oj.v23i44.p248-274.2025Keywords:
anthropology of Law, legal sociology, ought-to-be, philosophy of Law, theory of LawAbstract
Objectives: The article aims to address the relationship between Law, progress, and history in modernity, highlighting the implications of the separation between being and ought-to-be, exploring how Law is articulated with culture and civilizational progress, questioning the linearity of progress and its connection with modern causality and imputation.
Methodology: The study is based on a bibliographic analysis of Hans Kelsen’s texts, with contributions from commentators. The reference is used to show how progress has been a presupposition of normative transformations that constrain moral autonomy, establishing a restricted space of agency. The reflection begins with a critique of the implicit progressive conception of history, justifying the transition from a primitive culture to a modern civilization, based on Kelsen’s thought.
Results: In this approach, the modern belief in a division between civilized and non-civilized societies is based on a metaphysics that filters facts according to what ought to be, assigning a progressive historical meaning. The reflection on the causality and imputation of legal actions is crucial to understand how law is related to historical and social facts, linked to a progressive worldview.
Contributions: The text questions the linearity of progress as a norm and reflects on the possibility of deconstructing modern causality. By criticizing Kelsen’s thought through the relativist lens of structural anthropology, it seeks to expose the tension between hegemonic culture and different forms of social organization.
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 José Mauro Garboza Junior
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Copyright and Licensing
According to the current submission policy, authors retain the rights to their works and grant the Revista Opinião Jurídica the right of first publication, with commercial rights reserved by the publisher under the terms of the non-commercial license used. Revista Opinião Jurídica uses a Creative Commons license. The works published are under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License (CC-BY-NC-SA).
This license enables reusers to distribute, remix, adapt, and build upon the material in any medium or format for noncommercial purposes only, and only so long as attribution is given to the creator. If you remix, adapt, or build upon the material, you must license the modified material under identical terms. CC BY-NC-SA includes the following elements:
BY: credit must be given to the creator.
NC: Only noncommercial uses of the work are permitted.
SA: Adaptations must be shared under the same terms.
RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE CONTENT
By submitting an article, the author(s) declare to have sole responsibility for the content of the piece and is(are), therefore, responsible for any judicial or extrajudicial measures referring to it.
1. In case of joint authorship, all authors are considered collectively responsible, except when proved otherwise.
