mined system of norms.547 Accordingly, the will of the legislator constitutes the guiding principle of statute interpretation. The formal rules of scientific reasoning, however, forbid the use of a fiction as a causal explanation to given a fact; this also applies to legal science, that is, provided that it constitutes a discourse governed by the customary principles of scientific reasoning. Hence, the identification of positive law with valid law neither can be a proper scientific explanation nor be used as such when explaining various legal facts, such as the validity of law. It is thus natural that Hägerström rejected the will of the legislator as being an exclusive guiding principle for interpretation.548 In order to be of any help when determining the applicability of positive law, that is, when determining valid law, the interpretation of statutes must take a number of things into consideration. First, it is imperative to decide what valid law is. According to Hägerström, as well asVilhelm Lundstedt and Alf Ross, valid law almost necessarily entails a modification of the positive rules of law through the actual or hypothetical application of these rules as they are presented in the fixed sources of law. However, this does not mean that valid law, as a concept, includes the principles of the common sense of justice, natural law, and rational law or objective law (in the metaphysical sense of the word).549 The reason why these principles are not included in valid law is that none of them can satisfy society’s interest and demand for a uniform, predictable, consistent, and objective application of positive law, which is due to the fact that these “sources” or “principles” constitute standards (in relation to the fixed prescripts of a ca l l f o r s c i e n t i f i c p u r i t y 551 547 Hägerström, Objektiva rättens begrepp, pp. 16 and 154-157;“The Notion of Law,” pp. 74-75 and 240-243; Stat och rätt, pp. 19-24. 548 Hägerström, Objektiva rättens begrepp, passim;“The Notion of Law,” passim;“Är gälllande rätt?,”passim; “Is Positive Law?,”passim. 549 Hägerström, “Begreppet gällande rätt,” pp. 86-87. 8 . 5. 1 e l iminating metaphys ics from the doctrine of statute inte rpretat ion
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjYyNDk=