|
Frank Van Dun (born February 22, 1947, Antwerp) is a Belgian law philosopher and libertarian natural law theorist. He is associated with the law faculty of the University of Ghent. ==Work== Van Dun published his book ''Het Fundamenteel Rechtsbeginsel'' (Dutch for ''The Fundamental Principle of Law'') in 1983, in which he argued that a rationally convincing answer to the question "what is law?" can only be found by respecting dialogue and argumentation. He thus adheres to argumentation ethics justification of private law society or anarcho-capitalism. Based on this premise, Van Dun argues that every natural person (individual) has a lawful claim on his life, freedom and property. This claim is absolute, insofar it does not prohibit the equivalent claims of other natural persons, i.e. insofar as argumentation is respected. Van Dun clearly distinguishes the ''lawful'' (ius) and the ''legal'' (lex). In his view, Western positive law systems reduce people to human resources, artificial persons with merely legal status. Positive law defines the ''legal'' but can only be ''lawful'' insofar as individuals have full secession rights from the institutional framework that is making said positive law. It logically follows that no judge can be forced upon a person who is willing to search a lawful solution for any conflict. Van Dun claims that the correct interpretation of the non-aggression principle (NAP) is praxeological rather than physical, because property is a "means of action". He thus claims ''freedom before property'' instead of ''freedom as property''. This implies that it's not necessarily only the last action in the chain of social causations that is unlawful. Consider the following examples: * With regards to land encirclement, a praxeological NAP could imply a "freedom proviso" when the encircling land owner refuses to discuss a reasonable solution. * With regards to copyrights, a praxeological NAP implies that the use of one's signature (as an expression of one's body as "means of action") could reasonably be considered more important than the physical freedom of exactly copying another person's signature with one's paper and ink. * With regards to freedom of speech, a praxeological NAP could imply that it is unlawful for an individual to order an unlawful act, e.g. a general ordering a murder of someone willing to seek lawful solutions. The ''freedom before property'' interpretation of the NAP is not widely accepted within the libertarian community. For example, Walter Block adheres to the ''freedom as property'' interpretation.〔Block, Walter (2004). ''Reply to Frank Van Dun's Natural Law and the Jurisprudence of Freedom''. Journal of Libertarian Studies. (PDF )〕 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「Frank Van Dun」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク
|