Today, the Thursday Seminar Series warmly welcomes Tongdong Bai (Fudan University), who will be presenting at 3:30pm in the RSSS Auditorium (room 1.28). Title and abstract are below.
Other events in the day include:
- A grads-only pre-talk session with the speaker in room 6.68 at 2:00pm;
- Tea in the School of Philosophy tearoom at 3:00pm;
- Drinks at Badger & Co at 5:00pm;
- Dinner at Mama's Trattoria (changeable before noon if you have objections!) at 6:30pm, half-subsidized for grad students (put your name down here if you would like to join).
- All visitors (faculty, graduate students, undergraduates) are welcome to join for dinner. Faculty dine at a rate of ~$30.00 AUD, and graduate students and undergraduates at a rate of roughly $15.00 AUD.
Title: Between Natural Law and Positive Law: On Han Fei Zi’s Thin Version of the Rule of Law
Abstract: The Chinese Legalists are often condemned as defenders of despotism. But obviously, this school has the term “fa” in its name, although “fa” has a broader scope than law in the Western tradition. On the narrow sense of this term, which means “law,” the critics claim that Legalism embraces “rule by law” at best, and not “rule of law,” but such a claim is often the result of confusions about the meanings of relevant terms in legal philosophy. One thing I wish to achieve in this paper is to clarify these terms: “rule by man,” “rule by law,” “positive law” (or “legal positivism”), “rule of law,” and “natural law,” and defend a thin version of the rule of law. Those who are critical of Legalists such as Han Fei Zi often take a very “thick” reading of the rule of law, making it the rule of the good law or a form of natural law, while a “thin” version of the rule of law has the merits of conceptual clarity, universalizability, and minimum goodness. Through looking into the continuous spectrum from rule by man to natural law, especially how rule by law can be transformed into the rule of law through acquiring certain features, the rule of law can be characterized by eight principles, which legal theorists from different schools may agree. Based on these principles, we can show that Han Fei Zi’s understanding of the law is firmly in the camp of the rule of law. But his theory has some subtle differences from Western legal theories, and the study of it may then contribute to the enrichment of our understanding of law and politics. His thin version of the rule of law may be one of the “thinnest,” which may be instrumental to address the practical issue of how to save failed states.
This will surely be, by the rule of law, a great talk,
Josh