Rule of law is a concept that is regularly debated by legal philosophers, often in connection to discussion of the concept of law. In this article, the focus is not on the substance of the conceptual claims, but on the methodologies employed by legal philosophers, investigating seminal articles on the rule of law by Joseph Raz and Jeremy Waldron. I argue that their philosophical argumentations often crucially depend on empirical or legal doctrinal arguments. However, these arguments remain underdeveloped. I explore how these arguments could be linked to approaches related to rule of law in different fields of legal scholarship and investigate how the methodologies of these fields may complement each other. Thus, the article aims to provide an argument for a specific form of triangulation of three kinds of approaches to the rule of law: philosophical, social-scientific and legal doctrinal. This method of triangulation is illustrated by a discussion of the World Justice Project’s Rule of Law Index.

中文翻译：

---

法治研究的方法论：为什么法律哲学需要实证和学说奖学金

法治是法律哲学家经常辩论的一个概念，通常与对法律概念的讨论有关。在本文中，重点不是概念主张的实质，而是法律哲学家所采用的方法论，研究约瑟夫·拉兹 (Joseph Raz) 和杰里米·沃尔德 (Jeremy Waldron) 关于法治的开创性文章。我认为，他们的哲学论证通常在很大程度上取决于经验或法律学说的论证。然而，这些论点仍然不充分。我探讨了这些论点如何与不同法律学术领域中与法治相关的方法联系起来，并研究这些领域的方法论如何相互补充。因此，本文旨在为三种法治方法的特定三角测量形式提供一个论据：哲学、社会科学和法律学说。对世界正义项目的法治指数的讨论说明了这种三角测量方法。