英文摘要 |
In the 1960s, Patrick Devlin and H. L. A. Hart famously debated the legal enforcement of morality (legal moralism), marking the start of subsequent debates between advocates of the harm principle and defenders of legal moralism. In the previous two decades, numerous scholars have revisited the Hart-Devlin debate, and some liberals, such as Jeffrie Murphy, have even come to doubt the harm principle. On the basis of the neglected arguments of Devlin and the work of contemporary philosophers, I argue that the application of some form of legal moralism provides slight advantages over the application of the harm principle. |