ABSTRACT
This chapter considers the relation between law and philosophy, with particular emphasis on the realist period, and describes how the realists and their predecessors used philosophy to develop and defend their critique of formalism. It concerns the issues dealt with that more elusive form of legal philosophy, "law and metaphysics". The chapter argues that the reemergence of doubts about current modes of legal explanation and methods of intepretation has created renewed interest in philosophy among lawyers. It also considers some of the main lines of argument in Wittgenstein on Rules and Private Language and the impact of Saul Kripke's book on current debates about indeterminacy and the possibility of authoritative interpretation in law. Thus far, Kripke's argument seems to resemble those of literary theorists and legal academics who deny the existence of any objective meaning in a text.
