{"id":3445,"date":"2022-07-19T14:58:00","date_gmt":"2022-07-19T14:58:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\/?post_type=publicacoes&p=3445"},"modified":"2023-09-22T13:42:20","modified_gmt":"2023-09-22T13:42:20","slug":"conceptual-norms-contrasting-theories","status":"publish","type":"publicacoes","link":"https:\/\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\/en\/publicacoes\/conceptual-norms-contrasting-theories\/","title":{"rendered":"Conceptual norms: contrasting theories"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Mainstream accounts of conceptual norms depict them as a specifc kind of (sub) norms in as much as they establish a certain equivalence without making reference to an action-type, which implies also that they lack a deontic modalization. However, such non-prescriptive explanation raises some serious problems, mainly when it is assumed that the introduction of a conceptual norm into a normative system changes the content of the system. Those problems pave the way to contrast such explanation with a prescriptive alternative according to which conceptual norms are regulative in character, though with the peculiarity of addressing the mental action of qualifying something in accordance with a given equivalence. All-things-considered, from such contrast it seems to follow that the prescriptive explanation is less problematic than the non-prescriptive one<\/p>\n","protected":false},"template":"","meta":{"imagem-da-publicacao":"https:\/\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/07\/conceptual-norms.jpg","areas-de-investigacao":"Teoria do Direito","investigador-responsavel":[],"editor-externo":"","editor":[],"autores-externos":"David Duarte","referencia-biografica":"DUARTE, D. 2023. Conceptual Norms: Contrasting Theories. Isonomia. 58. 32-56.","projeto-a-que-pertence":"Lisbon Legal Theory","selecionar_o_projeto_a_que_pertence":[],"titulo-do-livro-revista":"Isonomia ","ano":"2022","isbn":"","editora":"","link-para-download":"https:\/\/www.isonomia.itam.mx\/index.php\/revista-cientifica\/article\/download\/481\/2591"},"cluster":[34],"categoria-da-publicacao":[38],"grupo-de-investigacao":[13],"class_list":["post-3445","publicacoes","type-publicacoes","status-publish","hentry","cluster-lisbon-legal-theory","categoria-da-publicacao-artigo","grupo-de-investigacao-teoria-e-filosofia-do-direito"],"yoast_head":"\nConceptual norms: contrasting theories - Lisbon Public Law<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Mainstream accounts of conceptual norms depict them as a specifc kind of (sub) norms in as much as they establish a certain equivalence without making reference to an action-type, which implies also that they lack a deontic modalization. However, such non-prescriptive explanation raises some serious problems, mainly when it is assumed that the introduction of a conceptual norm into a normative system changes the content of the system. Those problems pave the way to contrast such explanation with a prescriptive alternative according to which conceptual norms are regulative in character, though with the peculiarity of addressing the mental action of qualifying something in accordance with a given equivalence. All-things-considered, from such contrast it seems to follow that the prescriptive explanation is less problematic than the non-prescriptive one\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\/en\/publicacoes\/conceptual-norms-contrasting-theories\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Conceptual norms: contrasting theories - Lisbon Public Law\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Mainstream accounts of conceptual norms depict them as a specifc kind of (sub) norms in as much as they establish a certain equivalence without making reference to an action-type, which implies also that they lack a deontic modalization. However, such non-prescriptive explanation raises some serious problems, mainly when it is assumed that the introduction of a conceptual norm into a normative system changes the content of the system. Those problems pave the way to contrast such explanation with a prescriptive alternative according to which conceptual norms are regulative in character, though with the peculiarity of addressing the mental action of qualifying something in accordance with a given equivalence. All-things-considered, from such contrast it seems to follow that the prescriptive explanation is less problematic than the non-prescriptive one\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\/en\/publicacoes\/conceptual-norms-contrasting-theories\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Lisbon Public Law\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2023-09-22T13:42:20+00:00\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"1 minute\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\/publicacoes\/conceptual-norms-contrasting-theories\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\/publicacoes\/conceptual-norms-contrasting-theories\/\",\"name\":\"Conceptual norms: contrasting theories - Lisbon Public Law\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2022-07-19T14:58:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2023-09-22T13:42:20+00:00\",\"description\":\"Mainstream accounts of conceptual norms depict them as a specifc kind of (sub) norms in as much as they establish a certain equivalence without making reference to an action-type, which implies also that they lack a deontic modalization. However, such non-prescriptive explanation raises some serious problems, mainly when it is assumed that the introduction of a conceptual norm into a normative system changes the content of the system. Those problems pave the way to contrast such explanation with a prescriptive alternative according to which conceptual norms are regulative in character, though with the peculiarity of addressing the mental action of qualifying something in accordance with a given equivalence. All-things-considered, from such contrast it seems to follow that the prescriptive explanation is less problematic than the non-prescriptive one\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\/publicacoes\/conceptual-norms-contrasting-theories\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\/publicacoes\/conceptual-norms-contrasting-theories\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\/publicacoes\/conceptual-norms-contrasting-theories\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Publica\u00e7\u00f5es\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\/publicacoes\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":3,\"name\":\"Conceptual norms: contrasting theories\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\/\",\"name\":\"Lisbon Public Law\",\"description\":\"Public Law Research Centre in Lisbon\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\/#organization\"},\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Lisbon Public Law\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/WhatsApp-Image-2023-06-19-at-11.01.50-1.jpeg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/WhatsApp-Image-2023-06-19-at-11.01.50-1.jpeg\",\"width\":354,\"height\":354,\"caption\":\"Lisbon Public Law\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\"}}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Conceptual norms: contrasting theories - Lisbon Public Law","description":"Mainstream accounts of conceptual norms depict them as a specifc kind of (sub) norms in as much as they establish a certain equivalence without making reference to an action-type, which implies also that they lack a deontic modalization. However, such non-prescriptive explanation raises some serious problems, mainly when it is assumed that the introduction of a conceptual norm into a normative system changes the content of the system. Those problems pave the way to contrast such explanation with a prescriptive alternative according to which conceptual norms are regulative in character, though with the peculiarity of addressing the mental action of qualifying something in accordance with a given equivalence. All-things-considered, from such contrast it seems to follow that the prescriptive explanation is less problematic than the non-prescriptive one","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\/en\/publicacoes\/conceptual-norms-contrasting-theories\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Conceptual norms: contrasting theories - Lisbon Public Law","og_description":"Mainstream accounts of conceptual norms depict them as a specifc kind of (sub) norms in as much as they establish a certain equivalence without making reference to an action-type, which implies also that they lack a deontic modalization. However, such non-prescriptive explanation raises some serious problems, mainly when it is assumed that the introduction of a conceptual norm into a normative system changes the content of the system. Those problems pave the way to contrast such explanation with a prescriptive alternative according to which conceptual norms are regulative in character, though with the peculiarity of addressing the mental action of qualifying something in accordance with a given equivalence. All-things-considered, from such contrast it seems to follow that the prescriptive explanation is less problematic than the non-prescriptive one","og_url":"https:\/\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\/en\/publicacoes\/conceptual-norms-contrasting-theories\/","og_site_name":"Lisbon Public Law","article_modified_time":"2023-09-22T13:42:20+00:00","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Est. reading time":"1 minute"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\/publicacoes\/conceptual-norms-contrasting-theories\/","url":"https:\/\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\/publicacoes\/conceptual-norms-contrasting-theories\/","name":"Conceptual norms: contrasting theories - Lisbon Public Law","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\/#website"},"datePublished":"2022-07-19T14:58:00+00:00","dateModified":"2023-09-22T13:42:20+00:00","description":"Mainstream accounts of conceptual norms depict them as a specifc kind of (sub) norms in as much as they establish a certain equivalence without making reference to an action-type, which implies also that they lack a deontic modalization. However, such non-prescriptive explanation raises some serious problems, mainly when it is assumed that the introduction of a conceptual norm into a normative system changes the content of the system. Those problems pave the way to contrast such explanation with a prescriptive alternative according to which conceptual norms are regulative in character, though with the peculiarity of addressing the mental action of qualifying something in accordance with a given equivalence. All-things-considered, from such contrast it seems to follow that the prescriptive explanation is less problematic than the non-prescriptive one","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\/publicacoes\/conceptual-norms-contrasting-theories\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\/publicacoes\/conceptual-norms-contrasting-theories\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\/publicacoes\/conceptual-norms-contrasting-theories\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Publica\u00e7\u00f5es","item":"https:\/\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\/publicacoes\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":3,"name":"Conceptual norms: contrasting theories"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\/#website","url":"https:\/\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\/","name":"Lisbon Public Law","description":"Public Law Research Centre in Lisbon","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\/#organization"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\/#organization","name":"Lisbon Public Law","url":"https:\/\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/WhatsApp-Image-2023-06-19-at-11.01.50-1.jpeg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/WhatsApp-Image-2023-06-19-at-11.01.50-1.jpeg","width":354,"height":354,"caption":"Lisbon Public Law"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"}}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/publicacoes\/3445","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/publicacoes"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/publicacoes"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3445"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"cluster","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/cluster?post=3445"},{"taxonomy":"categoria-da-publicacao","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categoria-da-publicacao?post=3445"},{"taxonomy":"grupo-de-investigacao","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/grupo-de-investigacao?post=3445"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}