kelsen was the proponent of the pure theory of law.

kelsen wanted to eliminate from

law the alien concepts or elements such as the morality or social sciences.
the old witgeinstein tractracus he wanted to have a language that is only variable
falsifiable to a particular fact, (if you cannot use language then it is futile to
talk to any concept that is not with the correspondence with a factual fact)

the element of morality- this is a direct contradiction to st aaquinas

what is the method of hans kelsen

attempts to answer what and how the law is. in other words engaged in a descriptive
study of the law.
wants u deal with morality ur asking how the law should be - kelsen

how the law can be pure/ it can be pure if u engage only to the descriptive study
of law. we now go to the definition of the pure theory of law compared to other
methodology

according to hans the problem with legal philosophers is that they do not agree
with the other/ precisely because there is a saying how law should be or questions
what law should be? or engages in a descriptive school of reasoning eventually that
philosophy would fall/ each culture have their own norm

that is not pure theory of law/// theory of law is simply describe the law/
restricts itself to the structural/ that exist in history under the name of law/
hans kelsen simply described what is the source of law regardless if the law is
moral or not

what is sociology vs pure theory of law

a system of valid norms created by acts of human being.. pure theory of law law is
valid set of norms created by acts of human beings
it is even wrong to combine the study of justice in the study of law/ study of
justice is impurity or dirt in the pure theory of law/ what is justice???
because ur going to study justice ur gonna begin to ask yourself what is the
ethical thing to do or prescriptive questions/

justice is applying the law that humans created based on the facts of the case...
in a very positive way/ justice is variable falsicibale and coressponds to a
particular fact.

theory of law is defining the object matter/ if u want it to be pure dapat mag
simula sa object matter/ the source of law or mode of law

certain pattern which he called legal orders/ what is legal orders?

nakita niya na sa lahat ng to may isang element na common denominator sa lahat ng

legal orders and what is this? element of coercion

inspite of history/ they present common element like coercive acts/

kelsen agreed with the philosophical investigation

the rule in the language game cannot be imposed as an absolute rule to a another
game

kelsen descriptive daw pag aral ng batas

ayaw ng prescriptive

kelsen purist tayo ayaw ng prescriptive pag hinaluan magkakagulo lang daw
lahat may coercive power/ something outh is to be done/ all kelsen wanted to be a
purist in a study of law by elimanting the element of being descriptive

yun din yung bagay na di niya maawisan dahil sa theory of coercion kelsen is guilty

austin gunman theory kung sino may hwak ng baril siya ang source mo

what is the difference of valitdy and ethicacy

validity refers to legal norms that are binding

effectiveness of law is that men actually behave in accordance with the legal
norm / it is a fact that a norm.

hindi porket di sinusunod ay hindi siya valid.

if there is no ethicacy there is no law

not all laws are valid.. why?

go back to the ludwig witgeinstein/ law are territorial in nature. has the
jurisdictional element..

ang pagiging effective niya ay sine qua non means without which it is not/ ng
validity therefore all law must be effective in order to be valid

dynamic and legal orders

man made governing acts / there is a difference when it is dynamic type

in every country even if there is a shared static law there is a difference depende
sa culture ng tao tawag dun ay dynamic legal order/ for ex netherlands allowed
prosti satin hindi
mag kaiba and dynamic order but same static order that life is precious
static legal order - kung gano kahalaga yung buhay

legal order here in ph is a dynamic one

ang dynamic system of norm meron lagi reason na higher norm this is what u called
the jurisprudence ratio dissente which is the source of the validity of that law\

cyber liber law that or meron na siya which is provided in the libel provision in
the civil code

consitution is the apex of the pyramid of norms

all dynamic norms should be able to measure and not contrary to the constitution of
the philippines.

first consti, bigla na siyang pyramid na sanga sanga na at magiging dynamic na ang
batas..

ex. history /

approach of kelsen is very factual

-problema ni kelsen ay cinucut niya ang source of law niya sa constitution.

exercise of ordinance of reason

every law must be in effect with another law

kelsen is based on preposition/ which is the bagay na yaw niya sa theory niya ay
yun din binagsakan niya

legal validity of rules / cannot be demonstrated by a hypothesis/ pano yun ginawa

ni hart/ so hart voted kelsen for focusing too much on the creation of law/

kelsen did not include sociology. he fell into the very trap that he is trying to
avoid. so ngayon si hart ay sinasabe niya ay a

law is the primary and secondary rules (lalabas to sa exam)

di pwedeng purist ang pagaaral ng batas..
must study primary and secondary rules

una may right ba ko para pagsabihan ako

dalawa kung empowered ba ko na pagsabihian ka
binding ba yung source na yon sa pinagsasabihan ko

karapatan na word. given that example obviously wala kasi moral obligation lang
tumulong.. /