From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jurisprudence
The Final Honour School of
Jurisprudence is also the formal name of
the undergraduate Bachelor of Arts
degree in Law awarded by the University
of Oxford
Philosophers of law ask "what is law?" and
"what should it be?"
Jurisprudence is the theory and philo-
sophy of law. Scholars of jurisprudence, or
legal philosophers, hope to obtain a deeper
understanding of the nature of law, of legal
reasoning, legal systems and of legal institu-
tions. As jurisprudence has developed, there
are three main aspects with which scholarly
writing engages:
• is the idea that there are unchangeable
laws of nature which govern us, and that
our laws and institutions should try to
align with this natural law.
• asks questions distinctive to legal
philosophy like, "What is law?" "What are
the criteria for legal validity?" or "What is
the relationship between law and
morality?" and other such questions that
legal philosophers may engage.
• asks what law ought to be. It is close to
political philosophy, and includes
questions of whether one ought to obey
the law, on what grounds law-breakers
might properly be punished, the proper
1
Jurisprudence
uses and limits of regulation, how judges
ought to decide cases.
Modern jurisprudence and philosophy of law
is dominated today primarily by Western aca-
demics. The ideas of the Western legal tradi-
tion have become so pervasive throughout
the world that it is tempting to see them as
universal. Historically, however, many philo-
sophers from other traditions have discussed
the same questions, from Islamic scholars to
the ancient Greeks.
Etymology
The English term is based on the Latin word
jurisprudentia: juris is the genitive form of
jus meaning "law", and prudentia means
"knowledge". The word is first attested in
English in 1628[1], at a time when the word
prudence had the now obsolete meaning of
"knowledge of or skill in a matter". The word
may have come via the French jurisprudence,
which is attested earlier.
History of jurisprudence
Jurisprudence already had this meaning in
Ancient Rome, even if at its origins the dis-
cipline was a monopoly of the College of
Pontiffs (Pontifex), which retained an exclus-
ive power of judgment on facts, being the
only experts (periti) in the jus of traditional
law (mos maiorum, a body of oral laws and
customs verbally transmitted "by father to
son"). Pontiffs indirectly created a body of
laws by their pronunciations (sententiae) on
single concrete (judicial) cases.
Their sentences were supposed to be
simple interpretations of the traditional cus-
toms, but effectively it was an activity that,
apart from formally reconsidering for each
case what precisely was traditionally in the
legal habits, soon turned also to a more
equitative interpretation, coherently adapting
the law to the newer social instances. The
law was then implemented with new evolut-
ive Institutiones (legal concepts), while re-
maining in the traditional scheme. Pontiffs
were replaced in 3rd century BC by a laical
body of prudentes. Admission to this body
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jurisprudence

Natural law
Natural law theory asserts that there are
laws that are immanent in nature, to which
enacted laws should correspond as closely as
possible. This view is frequently summarised
by the maxim an unjust law is not a true law ,
lex iniusta non est lex, in which ’unjust’ is
defined as contrary to natural law. Natural
law is closely associated with morality and, in
historically influential versions, with the in-
tentions of God. To oversimplify its concepts
somewhat, natural law theory attempts to
identify a moral compass to guide the law-
making power of the state and to promote
’the good’. Notions of an objective moral or-
der, external to human legal systems, under-
lie natural law. What is right or wrong can
vary according to the interests one is focused
upon. Natural law is sometimes identified
with the maxim that "an unjust law is no law
at all", but as John Finnis, the most important
of modern natural lawyers has argued, this
maxim is a poor guide to the classical Thom-
ist position.

Aristotle

The Central Criminal Court of England and

Wales

was conditional upon proof of competence or

experience.
Under the Roman Republic, schools of law
were created, and the activity constantly be-
came more academic. In the age from the
early Roman Empire to the 3rd century, a rel-
evant literature was produced by some not-
able groups including the Proculians and
Sabinians. The degree of scientific depth of
the studies was unprecedented in ancient
times and reached still unrivaled peaks of
skill. It is about this activity that it has been
said that Romans had developed an art out of
the law.
After the 3rd century, Juris prudentia be-
came a more bureaucratic activity, with few
notable authors. It was during the Byzantine Aristotle, by Francesco Hayez
Empire (5th century) that legal studies were
once again undertaken in depth, and it is Aristotle is often said to be the father of nat-
from this cultural movement that Justinian’s ural law.[2] Like his philosophical forefathers,
Corpus Juris Civilis was born. Socrates and Plato, Aristotle posited the

2
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jurisprudence

existence of natural justice or natural right

(dikaion physikon, δικαιον φυσικον, Latin ius
naturale). His association with natural law is
due largely to the interpretation given to him
by Thomas Aquinas.[3] This was based on
Aquinas’ conflation of natural law and natur-
al right, the latter of which Aristotle posits in
Book V of the Nicomachean Ethics (= Book
IV of the Eudemian Ethics). Aquinas’ influ-
ence was such as to affect a number of early
translations of these passages,[4] though
more recent translations render them more
literally.[5]
Aristotle conceives of justice in two man-
ners. Firstly, the most important but often
overlooked form of justice is termed General
Justice. Aristotle’s objectivist ethics pro-
claims that there are some legal systems
which are more just than other legal systems.
The best politico-legal system will promote
the greatest virutes of character, which Aris-
totle details extensively in the Nicomacean
Ethics, in the citizens which constitute that
society. Hence, general justice is the aspira-
tional state of political, ethical and legal
activities. It refersnatural justice is a species
of political justice, viz. the scheme of dis-
tributive and corrective justice that would be
established under the best political com-
munity;[6] were this to take the form of law,
this could be called a natural law, though
The first sura in a Qur’anic manuscript by
Aristotle does not discuss this and suggests
Hattat Aziz Efendi.
in the Politics that the best regime may not
rule by law at all.[7]
Sharia (‫ )ٌةَعيِرَش‬refers to the body of Islamic
The best evidence of Aristotle’s having
law. The term means "way" or "path"; it is the
thought there was a natural law comes from
legal framework within which public and
the Rhetoric, where Aristotle notes that,
most private aspects of life are regulated for
aside from the "particular" laws that each
those living in a legal system based on Islam-
people has set up for itself, there is a "com-
ic principles of jurisprudence. Fiqh is the
mon" law that is according to nature.[8] The
term for Islamic jurisprudence, made up of
context of this remark, however, suggests
the rulings of Islamic jurists. A component of
only that Aristotle advised that it could be
Islamic studies, Fiqh expounds the methodo-
rhetorically advantageous to appeal to such a
logy by which Islamic law is derived from
law, especially when the "particular" law of
primary and secondary sources.
ones’ own city was averse to the case being
Mainstream Islam distinguish fiqh, which
made, not that there actually was such a
means understanding details and inferences
law;[9] Aristotle, moreover, considered two of
drawn by scholars, from sharia that refers to
the three candidates for a universally valid,
principles that lie behind the fiqh. Scholars
natural law provided in this passage to be
hope that fiqh and sharia are in harmony in
wrong.[10] Aristotle’s theoretical paternity of
any given case, but this cannot be as-
the natural law tradition is consequently
sured.[11]
disputed.
Early forms of logic in Islamic philosophy
were introduced in Islamic jurisprudence
Sharia and Fiqh in Islam
from the 7th century with the process of Qiy-
as. During the Islamic Golden Age, there was

3
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
a logical debate among Islamic philosophers
and jurists whether the term Qiyas refers to
analogical reasoning, inductive reasoning or
categorical syllogism. Some Islamic scholars
argued that Qiyas refers to reasoning, which
Ibn Hazm (994-1064) disagreed with, arguing
that Qiyas does not refer to inductive reason-
ing, but refers to categorical syllogism in a
real sense and analogical reasoning in a
metaphorical sense. On the other hand, al-
Ghazali (1058-1111) (and in modern times,
Abu Muhammad Asem al-Maqdisi) argued
that Qiyas refers to analogical reasoning in a
real sense and categorical syllogism in a
metaphorical sense. Other Islamic scholars at
the time, however, argued that the term Qiy-
as refers to both analogical reasoning and
categorical syllogism in a real sense.[12]
Thomas Aquinas
Thomas Aquinas was the most important
Western medieval legal scholar
Saint Thomas Aquinas [Thomas of Aquin, or
Aquino] (c. 1225 – 7 March 1274) was a
philosopher and theologian in the scholastic
tradition, known as "Doctor Angelicus, Doc-
tor Universalis". He is the foremost classical
4
Jurisprudence
proponent of natural theology, and the father
of the Thomistic school of philosophy, for a
long time the primary philosophical approach
of the Roman Catholic Church. The work for
which he is best-known is the Summa Theolo-
gica. One of the thirty-three Doctors of the
Church, he is considered by many Catholics
to be the Church’s greatest theologian. Con-
sequently, many institutions of learning have
been named after him.
Aquinas distinguished four kinds of law.
These are the eternal, natural, human, and
divine law. Eternal law is the decree of God
which governs all creation. Natural law is the
human "participation" in the eternal law and
is discovered by reason.[13] Natural law, of
course, is based on "first principles":
. . . this is the first precept of the law,
that good is to be done and promoted,
and evil is to be avoided. All other
precepts of the natural law are based on
this . . .[14]
The desire to live and to procreate are coun-
ted by Aquinas among those basic (natural)
human values on which all human values are
based. Human law is positive law: the natural
law applied by governments to societies. Div-
ine law is the law as specially revealed in the
scriptures and teachings of the apostles.
Thomas Hobbes
Thomas Hobbes was an English Enlighten-
ment scholar
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jurisprudence

In his treatise Leviathan, (1651), Hobbes ex- positivists, while still arguing that law is a
presses a view of natural law as a precept, or basically moral creature...
general rule, found out by reason, by which a
man is forbidden to do that which is destruct-
ive of his life, or takes away the means of
Analytic jurisprudence
preserving the same; and to omit that by
which he thinks it may best be preserved.
Hobbes was a social contractarian[15] and be-
lieved that the law gained peoples’ tacit con-
sent. He believed that society was formed
from a state of nature to protect people from
the state of war between mankind that exists
otherwise. Life is, without an ordered society,
"solitary, poore, nasty, brutish and short". It
is commonly commented that Hobbes’ views
about the core of human nature were influ-
enced by his times. The English Civil War and
the Cromwellian dictatorship had taken
place, and he felt absolute authority vested in
a monarch, whose subjects obeyed the law,
was the basis of a civilized society.

Lon Fuller
Writing after World War II, Lon L. Fuller not-
ably emphasised that the law must meet cer-
tain formal requirements (such as being im-
partial and publicly knowable). To the extent
Hume made the famous is-ought distinction
that an institutional system of social control
falls short of these requirements, Fuller ar-
Analytic, or ’clarificatory’ jurisprudence is us-
gues, we are less inclined to recognise it as a
ing a neutral point of view and descriptive
system of law, or to give it our respect. Thus,
language when referring to the aspects of
law has an internal morality that goes beyond
legal systems. This was a philosophical devel-
the social rules by which valid laws are
opment that rejected natural law’s fusing of
made. Fuller and scholar H.L.A. Hart were
what law is and what it ought to be.[16] David
colleagues at Oxford University. One of the
Hume famously argued in A Treatise of Hu-
disagreements between Fuller, a natural law-
man Nature[1][17] that people invariably slip
yer, and Hart, a positivist, was whether Nazi
between describing that the world is a cer-
law was so bad that it could no longer be con-
tain way to saying therefore we ought to con-
sidered law.
clude on a particular course of action. But as
a matter of pure logic, one cannot conclude
John Finnis
that we ought to do something merely be-
Sophisticated positivist and natural law the- cause something is the case. So analysing
ories sometimes resemble each other more and clarifying the way the world is must be
than the above descriptions might suggest, treated as a strictly separate question to
and they may concede certain points to the normative and evaluative ought questions.
other "side". Identifying a particular theorist The most important questions of analytic
as a positivist or a natural law theorist some- jurisprudence are: "What are laws?"; "What is
times involves matters of emphasis and de- the law?"; "What is the relationship between
gree, and the particular influences on the law and power/sociology?"; and, "What is the
theorist’s work. In particular, the older natur- relationship between law and morality?"
al lawyers, such as Aquinas and John Locke Legal positivism is the dominant theory, al-
made no distinction between analytic and though there are a growing number of critics,
normative jurisprudence. But modern natural who offer their own interpretations.
lawyers, such as John Finnis claim to be

5
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Legal positivists
Positivism simply means that the law is
something that is "posited": laws are validly
made in accordance with socially accepted
rules. The positivist view on law can be seen
to cover two broad principles: Firstly, that
laws may seek to enforce justice, morality, or
any other normative end, but their success or
failure in doing so does not determine their
validity. Provided a law is properly formed, in
accordance with the rules recognized in the
society concerned, it is a valid law, regard-
less of whether it is just by some other stand-
ard. Secondly, that law is nothing more than
a set of rules to provide order and gov-
ernance of society. No legal positivist,
however, argues that it follows that the law is
therefore to be obeyed, no matter what. This
is seen as a separate question entirely.
• What the law is - is determined by social
facts (or "sources’)
• What obedience the law is owed - is
determined by moral considerations.
Bentham and Austin
Bentham’s utilitarian theories remained dom-
inant in law till the twentieth century
One of the earliest legal positivists was
Jeremy Bentham. Bentham was an early and
staunch supporter of the utilitarian concept
6
Jurisprudence
(along with Hume), an avid prison reformer,
advocate for democracy, and strongly atheist.
Bentham’s views about law and jurispru-
dence were popularized by his student, John
Austin. Austin was the first chair of law at the
new University of London from 1829.
Austin’s utilitarian answer to "what is law?"
was that law is "commands, backed by threat
of sanctions, from a sovereign, to whom
people have a habit of obedience".[18] Con-
temporary legal positivists have long aban-
doned this view, and have criticised its over-
simplification, H.L.A. Hart particularly.
Hans Kelsen
Hans Kelsen is considered one of the preem-
inent jurists of the 20th century. He is most
influential in Europe, where his notion of a
Grundnorm or a "presupposed" ultimate and
basic legal norm, still retains some influence.
It is a hypothetical norm on which all sub-
sequent levels of a legal system such as con-
stitutional law and "simple" law are based.
Kelsen’s pure theory of law described the law
as being a set of social facts, which are norm-
atively binding too. Law’s normativity, mean-
ing that we must obey it, derives from a basic
rule which sits outside the law we can alter.
It is a rule proscribing the validity of all
others.
Kelsen was a Professor at several uni-
versities in Europe, notably the University of
Vienna and the University of Cologne. In
1940, he moved to the United States, giving
the Oliver Wendell Holmes Lectures at Har-
vard Law School in 1942 and becoming a full
professor at the department of political sci-
ence at the University of California, Berkeley
in 1945. During those years, he increasingly
dealt with issues of international law and in-
ternational institutions such as the United
Nations.
H.L.A. Hart
In the Anglophone world, the pivotal writer
was H.L.A. Hart, who argued that the law
should be understood as a system of social
rules. Hart rejected Kelsen’s views that sanc-
tions were essential to law and that a normat-
ive social phenomenon, like law, can not be
grounded in non-normative social facts. Hart
revived analytical jurisprudence as an im-
portant theoretical debate in the twentieth
century through his book The Concept of
Law.[19] As the chair of jurisprudence at
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jurisprudence

Oxford University, Hart argued law is a ’sys- Ronald Dworkin

tem of rules’.
Rules, said Hart, are divided into primary
rules (rules of conduct) and secondary rules
(rules addressed to officials to administer
primary rules). Secondary rules are divided
into rules of adjudication (to resolve legal dis-
putes), rules of change (allowing laws to be
varied) and the rule of recognition (allowing
laws to be identified as valid). The "rule of re-
cognition", a customary practice of the offi-
cials (especially judges) that identifies cer-
tain acts and decisions as sources of law. A
pivotal book on Hart was written by Neil
MacCormick[2] in 1981 (second edition due
in 2007), which further refined and offered
some important criticisms that led
MacCormick to develop his own theory (the
best example of which is his recently pub-
lished Institutions of Law, 2007). Other im-
portant critiques have included that of Ron-
ald Dworkin, John Finnis, and Joseph Raz.
In recent years, debates about the nature
of law have become increasingly fine-
grained. One important debate is within legal
positivism. One school is sometimes called
exclusive legal positivism, and it is associated Ronald Dworkin sought a theory of law which
would justify judges’ ability to strike down
with the view that the legal validity of a norm
democratically decided laws.
can never depend on its moral correctness. A
second school is labeled inclusive legal posit-
Ronald Dworkin is a leading philosopher. In
ivism, a major proponent of which is Wil
his book ’Law’s Empire’[22] Dworkin attacked
Waluchow, and it is associated with the view
Hart and the positivists for their refusal to
that moral considerations may determine the
treat law as a moral issue. Dworkin argues
legal validity of a norm, but that it is not ne-
that law is an ’interpretive’ concept, that re-
cessary that this is the case.
quires judges to find the best fitting and most
Joseph Raz just solution to a legal dispute, given their
constitutional traditions. According to him,
Some philosophers used to contend that pos-
law is not entirely based on social facts, but
itivism was the theory that there is "no ne-
includes the morally best justification for the
cessary connection" between law and moral-
institutional facts and practices that we intu-
ity; but influential contemporary positivists,
itively regard as legal. It follows on Dwor-
including Joseph Raz, John Gardner, and
kin’s view that one cannot know whether a
Leslie Green, reject that view. As Raz points
society has a legal system in force, or what
out, it is a necessary truth that there are
any of its laws are, until one knows some
vices that a legal system cannot possibly
moral truths about the justifications for the
have (for example, it cannot commit rape or
practices in that society. It is consistent with
murder).
Dworkin’s view--in contrast with the views of
Joseph Raz defends the positivist outlook,
legal positivists or legal realists--that *no
but criticised Hart’s "soft social thesis" ap-
one* in a society may know what its laws are
proach in The Authority of Law.[20] Raz ar-
(because no one may know the best justifica-
gues that law is authority, identifiable purely
tion for its practices.)
through social sources, without reference to
Interpretation, according to Dworkin’s law
moral reasoning. Any categorisation of rules
as integrity theory, has two dimensions. To
beyond their role as authoritative is best left
count as an interpretation, the reading of a
to sociology, rather than jurisprudence.[21]
text must meet the criterion of fit. But of

7
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
those interpretations that fit, Dworkin main-
tains that the correct interpretation is the
one that puts the political practices of the
community in their best light, or makes of
them the best that they can be. But many
writers have doubted whether there is a
single best justification for the complex prac-
tices of any given community, and others
have doubted whether, even if there are, they
should be counted as part of the law of that
community.
Legal realism
Oliver Wendell Holmes was a self-defined
legal realist
Legal realism was a view popular with some
Scandinavian and American writers. Skeptic-
al in tone, it held that the law should be un-
derstood and determined by the actual prac-
tices of courts, law offices, and police sta-
tions, rather than as the rules and doctrines
set forth in statutes or learned treatises. It
had some affinities with the sociology of law.
The essential tenet of legal realism is that all
law is made by human beings and, thus, is
subject to human foibles, frailties and
imperfections.
It has become quite common today to
identify Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., as
the main precursor of American Legal
8
Jurisprudence
Realism (other influences include Roscoe
Pound, Karl Llewellyn and Justice Benjamin
Cardozo). Karl Llewellyn, another founder of
the U.S. legal realism movement, similarly
believed that the law is little more than putty
in the hands of a judge who is able to shape
the outcome of a case based on personal bi-
ases.[23] The chief inspiration for Scandinavi-
an legal realism many consider to be the
works of Axel Hägerström. Despite its decline
in facial popularity, realists continue to influ-
ence a wide spectrum of jurisprudential
schools today, including critical legal studies
(scholars such as Duncan Kennedy and
Roberto Unger), feminist legal theory, critical
race theory, law and economics and law and
society.
The Historical School
Historical jurisprudence came to prominence
during the German debate over the proposed
codification of German law. In his book On
the Vocation of Our Age for Legislation and
Jurisprudence, [24] Friedrich Carl von Sav-
igny argued that Germany did not have a leg-
al language that would support codification
because the traditions, customs and beliefs of
the German people did not include a belief in
a code. The Historicists believe that the law
originates with society.
Normative jurisprudence
In addition to the question, "What is law?",
legal philosophy is also concerned with norm-
ative, or "evaluative" theories of law. What is
the goal or purpose of law? What moral or
political theories provide a foundation for the
law? What is the proper function of law?
What sorts of acts should be subject to pun-
ishment, and what sorts of punishment
should be permitted? What is justice? What
rights do we have? Is there a duty to obey the
law? What value has the rule of law? Some of
the different schools and leading thinkers are
as follows.
Virtue jurisprudence
Aretaic moral theories such as contemporary
virtue ethics emphasize the role of character
in morality. Virtue jurisprudence is the view
that the laws should promote the develop-
ment of virtuous characters by citizens. His-
torically, this approach is associated mainly
with Aristotle or Thomas Aquinas later.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jurisprudence

Plato (left) and Aristotle (right), a detail of Kant was a pre-eminent Enlightenment
The School of Athens thinker

Contemporary virtue jurisprudence is in-

spired by philosophical work on virtue ethics.

Deontology
Deontology is "the theory of duty or moral
obligation."[25] The philosopher Immanuel
Kant formulated one influential deontological
theory of law. He argued that any rule we fol-
low must be universalisable: we must be will-
ing to will everyone to follow that rule. A con-
temporary deontological approach can be
found in the work of the legal philosopher
Ronald Dworkin.

Utilitarianism
Utilitarianism is the view that the laws
should be crafted so as to produce the best
consequences. Historically, utilitarian think-
ing about law is associated with the great
philosopher, Jeremy Bentham. John Stuart
Mill was a pupil of Bentham’s and was the
torch bearer for utilitarian philosophy
through the late nineteenth century.[26] In
Mill believed law should create happiness
contemporary legal theory, the utilitarian ap-
proach is frequently championed by scholars
who work in the law and economics tradition. John Rawls
John Rawls was an American philosopher, a
professor of political philosophy at Harvard

9
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
University and author of A Theory of Justice
(1971), Political Liberalism, Justice as Fair-
ness: A Restatement, and The Law of
Peoples. He is widely considered one of the
most important English-language political
philosophers of the 20th century. His theory
of justice uses a device called the original po-
sition to ask us which principles of justice we
would choose to regulate the basic institu-
tions of our society if we were behind a `veil
of ignorance.’ Imagine we do not know who
we are - our race, sex, wealth status, class, or
any distinguishing feature - so that we would
not be biased in our own favour. Rawls ar-
gues from this ’original position’ that we
would choose exactly the same political liber-
ties for everyone, like freedom of speech, the
right to vote and so on. Also, we would
choose a system where there is only inequal-
ity because that produces incentives enough
for the economic well-being of all society, es-
pecially the poorest. This is Rawls’ famous
’difference principle’. Justice is fairness, in
the sense that the fairness of the original po-
sition of choice guarantees the fairness of the
principles chosen in that position.
There are many other normative ap-
proaches to the philosophy of law, including
critical legal studies and libertarian theories
of law.
References
[1] Oxford English Dictionary, 2nd edition
1989
[2] Shellens, "Aristotle on Natural Law."
[3] Jaffa, Thomism and Aristotelianism.
[4] H. Rackham, trans., Nicomachean
Ethics, Loeb Classical Library; J. A. K.
Thomson, trans. (revised by Hugh
Tedennick), Nicomachean Ethics,
Penguin Classics.
[5] Joe Sachs, trans., Nicomachean Ethics,
Focus Publishing
[6] Nicomachean Ethics, Bk. V, ch. 6–7.
[7] Politics, Bk. III, ch. 16.
[8] Rhetoric 1373b2–8.
[9] Shellens, "Aristotle on Natural Law,"
75–81
[10] "Natural Law," International
Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences.
[11] On the Sources of Islamic Law and
Practices, The Journal of law and religion
[0748-0814] Souaiaia yr:2005 vol:20
iss:1 pg:123
10
Jurisprudence
[12] Wael B. Hallaq (1993), Ibn Taymiyya
Against the Greek Logicians, p. 48.
Oxford University Press, ISBN
0198240430.
[13] Louis Pojman, Ethics (Belmont, CA:
Wadsworth Publishing Company, 1995).
[14] Summa, Q94a2.
[15] Basically meaning: the people of a
society are prepared give up some rights
to a government in order to receive
social order.
[16] See H L A Hart, ’Positivism and the
Separation of Law and Morals’ (1958) 71
Harv. L. Rev. 593
[17] David Hume, A Treatise of Human
Nature (1739)
[18] John Austin, The Providence of
Jurisprudence Determined (1831)
[19] H.L.A. Hart, The Concept of Law (1961)
Oxford University Press, ISBN
0-19-876122-8
[20] Joseph Raz, The Authority of Law (1979)
Oxford University Press
[21] ch. 2, Joseph Raz, The Authority of Law
(1979)
[22] Ronald Dworkin, Law’s Empire (1986)
Harvard University Press
[23] “Jurisprudence”. West’s Encyclopedia of
American Law. Ed. Jeffrey Lehman,
Shirelle Phelps. Detroit: Thomson/Gale,
2005.
[24] Friedrich Carl von Savigny, On the
Vocation of Our Age for Legislation and
Jurisprudence (Abraham A. Hayward
trans., 1831)
[25] Webster’s New World Dictionary of the
American Language, p. 378 (2d Coll. Ed.
1978).
[26] see, Utilitarianism at Metalibri Digital
Library
Further reading
• Austin, John (1831). The Province of
Jurisprudence Determined.
• Freeman, M.D.A. (2001). Lloyd’s
Introduction to Jurisprudence. 7th ed.
London: Sweet and Maxwell.
• Hart, H.L.A. (1961). The Concept of Law.
Oxford University Press.
• Hartzler, H. Richard (1976). Justice, Legal
Systems, and Social Structure. Port
Washington, NY: Kennikat Press.
• Hutchinson, Allan C., ed. (1989). Critical
Legal Studies. Totowa, NJ: Roman &
Littlefield.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jurisprudence

• Kempin, Jr., Frederick G. (1963). Legal • Strict • Germain • Quintus

History: Law and Social Change. interpretation Grisez Mucius
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. • Virtue • H.L.A. Hart Scaevola
• Llewellyn, Karl N. (1986). Karl N. jurisprudence • Georg Pontifex
Llewellyn on Legal Realism. Birmingham, Wilhelm • Roberto
AL: Legal Classics Library. (Contains Friedrich Unger
penetrating classic "The Bramble Bush" on Hegel • Jeremy
nature of law). Waldron
• Murphy, Cornelius F. (1977). Introduction • Ludwig
to Law, Legal Process, and Procedure. St. Wittgenstein
Paul, MN: West Publishing.
• Rawls, John (1999). A Theory of Justice,
revised ed. Cambridge: Harvard External links
University Press. (Philosophical treatment • [3] Navigate to page for Encyclopedia of
of justice). the Science of Law (Mellen, 2002).
• Zinn, Howard (1990). Declarations of • John Witte, Jr: A Brief Biography of
Independence: Cross-Examining American Dooyeweerd, based on Hendrik van
Ideology. New York: Harper Collins Eikema Hommes, Inleiding tot de
Publishers. Wijsbegeerte van Herman Dooyeweerd
(The Hague, 1982; pp 1–4,132).[4]
See also • LII Law about... Jurisprudence.
• The Case of the Speluncean Explorers:
• Wesley Nine New Opinions, by Peter Suber
General Philosopher Hohfeld (Routledge, 1998.) Lon Fuller’s classic of
• Analytical A-Z • Oliver jurisprudence brought up to date 50 years
jurisprudence Wendell later.
• Robert Alexy
• Brocard Holmes, Jr.
• The Roman Law Library, incl. Responsa
• Thomas
• Cautelary • Immanuel prudentium by Professor Yves Lassard and
Aquinas
jurisprudence Kant Alexandr Koptev.
• John Austin
• Critical legal • Hans Kelsen
• Evgeny Pashukanis - General Theory of
(legal
studies • Hans Law and Marxism.
philosophy)
• Fiqh Köchler • Internet Encyclopedia: Philosophy of Law.
• Jeremy
• Judicial • David Lyons
• The Opticon: Online Repository of
Bentham
activism • Neil Materials covering Spectrum of U.S.
• Emilio Betti
• Justice MacCormickJurisprudence.
• Norberto
• Law and • Karl Marx• For more information about Neil
Bobbio
economics • Karl MacCormick and the Edinburgh Legal
• António
• Legal Olivecrona Theory Research Group visit
Castanheira
formalism • Richard www.law.ed.ac.uk
Neves
• Legal Posner • Jurisprudence Revision Notes for
• Giorgio Del
positivism • Gustav Students: - LawTeacher.net -
Vecchio
• Legal realism Radbruch Jurisprudence
• Ronald
• Libertarian • John Rawls• Foundation for Law, Justice and Society
Dworkin
theories of • Joseph Raz• Bibliography on the Philosophy of Law.
• Joel Feinberg
law • Adolf Peace Palace Library
• John Finnis
• Living Reinach
• Lon L. Fuller
Constitution • Karl Renner
• Leslie Green
• Originalism • Friedrich
(philosopher)
• Natural law Karl von
• Robert P.
• Political Savigny
George
jurisprudence

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jurisprudence"

Categories: Roman law, Philosophy of law, Legal ethics, Social philosophy, Philosophy by field

11
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jurisprudence

This page was last modified on 6 May 2009, at 11:29 (UTC). All text is available under the
terms of the GNU Free Documentation License. (See Copyrights for details.) Wikipedia® is a
registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a U.S. registered 501(c)(3) tax-
deductible nonprofit charity. Privacy policy About Wikipedia Disclaimers

12