In 1958, G.E.M. Anscombe wrote: It is not profitable for us at present to do moral philosophy; that should be laid aside at any rate until we have an adequate philosophy of psychology, in which we are conspicuously lacking. Paraphrasing Anscombe, it is not profitable for us at present to do legal philosophy until we have an adequate understanding of the relationships between key jurisprudential concepts and philosophy of psychology, including under this rubric philosophy of action. The paper aims to contribute to this task. It scrutinises the relationships between the notions of intentional action, practical reason, control guidance and legal rule-following actions and tries to shed light on the normative and authoritative character of legal rules.