•

•
1.
2.
•

•
1.

2.
•

•
•

•
•
•
•

•
•
•
•
•
•

•
•
•
 The problem of infinite Regression

A rule of recognition decides the normative standing of all rules within a system except
itself. Its binding force is taken simply as a matter of fact

In criticism of Austin, Hart insists that normativity cannot be developed from mere habits
and irregularity. (This insistence puts into question Hart's whole account of normative
concepts, in an endless to and fro revelation of self.)
To explain why commands have binding power Hart gives validative process an appeal
from lesser norms to more basic norms. One soon reaches a stopping point.
One can not draw any normative inference from the behaviour pattern. Given Hart's
assumptions regarding normativity, 'X ought to be obeyed at time T' cannot entail 'X
ought to be obeyed at t+1 time

Under the Hartian definition of normativity, the latter inference (of continued
application) cannot derive from the former inference (of past application), because
the latter inference is a normative statement whereas the former inference is purely
factual
That X ought to be presupposed at time T does not entail that X ought to be
presupposed at time T+ 1. One would thus need an infinitely long chain of
presuppositions to produce diachronic normativity.
infinite regression looms
1.
2.