ABSTRACT
Scholars have not been reluctant to strike analogies between Hegel and Kelsen, however much the two may appear to be so antithetical. It should be specifically emphasized that already, with these authors, the dispute that would forcefully break out in 1920s, was beginning to smoulder. Hence, it was neo-Kantianism that would situate form prior to the content of experience, and would attempt to grasp the logico-formal premises rendering scientific knowledge possible even in the sphere of things spiritual, cultural, and societal. It is this very lack of any reconciliation, to be sure, that enabled legal irrationalism to burst onto the scene in 1930s, with the primacy of decision and of nihilistic will (interesting here are also some seminars held by Heidegger 1933-4 on nature, history, and state). Rickert and Weber were more perceptive than others in seeing that science advances by actively relinquishing its old paradigms, and this encompasses the cultural sciences, including history, but also science of law.
