We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. By continuing to browse this repository, you give consent for essential cookies to be used. You can read more about our Privacy and Cookie Policy.

Durham Research Online
You are in:

Philosophy and constitutional theory : the cautionary tale of Jeremy Waldron and the Philosopher's Stone.

Murray, K.L. (2019) 'Philosophy and constitutional theory : the cautionary tale of Jeremy Waldron and the Philosopher's Stone.', Canadian journal of law and jurisprudence., 32 (1). pp. 127-158.


This article considers the relationship between moral philosophy and constitutional theory through a detailed examination of the work of Jeremy Waldron—an unavoidable voice in contemporary constitutionalist debate. Through a rigorous, original and holistic deconstruction of his work and its philosophical implications, I argue that Waldron’s engagement with core philosophy within his constitutional scholarship is wholly problematic, containing a number of ambiguities and apparent inconsistencies. These issues, I suggest, may stem from an at times rather casual treatment of the realist/anti-realist issue of core philosophy, perhaps owing something to his view that it is in fact safely irrelevant to his constitutional pursuits. In any case, this view, I argue, is misguided, and the problems which result are real: they not only create issues of theoretical consistency and clarity; they put Waldron’s constitutional theory in danger. Like all good tales, I suggest there are lessons to be learned from this: one must think, and think carefully, about the philosophical background of one’s work, and take care in setting this out in a clear, thorough and coherent way—the stakes are too high not to. With this in mind, this article also lays some groundwork for a path into constitutional theory firmly grounded in my own anti-realist moral scepticism.

Item Type:Article
Full text:(AM) Accepted Manuscript
Download PDF
Publisher Web site:
Publisher statement:This article has been published in a revised form in Canadian journal of law and jurisprudence This version is free to view and download for private research and study only. Not for re-distribution, re-sale or use in derivative works. © Canadian Journal of Law and Jurisprudence 2019.
Date accepted:04 September 2018
Date deposited:07 September 2018
Date of first online publication:08 February 2019
Date first made open access:07 September 2018

Save or Share this output

Look up in GoogleScholar