Jurisprudence - Wikipedia





	
	

	
	

	Jurisprudence

	
		From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

		

		

		
		

		Jump to navigation
		Jump to search
		Theoretical study of law

For the "jurisprudence" of courts, see Case law.

"Concept of law" redirects here. For the book by H. L. A. Hart, see The Concept of Law.




	
	This article has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page. (Learn how and when to remove these template messages)

      	
	This article possibly contains original research. Please improve it by verifying the claims made and adding inline citations. Statements consisting only of original research should be removed.  (June 2018) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)



	
	This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed.
Find sources: "Jurisprudence" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR  (June 2018) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)



    


 (Learn how and when to remove this template message)



  
Philosophers of law ask "what is law, and what should it be?"



Jurisprudence, or legal theory, is the theoretical study of law. Scholars of jurisprudence seek to explain the nature of law in its most general form and provide a deeper understanding of legal reasoning and analogy, legal systems, legal institutions, and the role of law in society.[1]

Modern jurisprudence began in the 18th century and was focused on the first principles of natural law, civil law, and the law of nations.[2] General jurisprudence can be divided into categories both by the type of question scholars seek to answer and by the theories of jurisprudence, or schools of thought, regarding how those questions are best answered. Contemporary philosophy of law, which deals with general jurisprudence, addresses problems internal to law and legal systems and problems of law as a social institution that relates to the larger political and social context in which it exists.[3]

This article addresses three distinct branches of thought in general jurisprudence. Ancient natural law is the idea that there are rational objective limits to the power of legislative rulers. The foundations of law are accessible through reason, and it is from these laws of nature that human laws gain whatever force they have.[3] Analytic jurisprudence (Clarificatory jurisprudence) rejects natural law's fusing of what law is and what it ought to be. It espouses the use of a neutral point of view and descriptive language when referring to aspects of legal systems.[4] It encompasses such theories of jurisprudence as "legal positivism", which holds that there is no necessary connection between law and morality and that the force of law comes from basic social facts;[5] and "legal realism", which argues that the real-world practice of law determines what law is, the law having the force that it does because of what legislators, lawyers, and judges do with it. Normative jurisprudence is concerned with "evaluative" theories of law. It deals with what the goal or purpose of law is, or what moral or political theories provide a foundation for the law. It not only addresses the question "What is law?", but also tries to determine what the proper function of law should be, or what sorts of acts should be subject to legal sanctions, and what sorts of punishment should be permitted.


Contents


	1 Etymology
	2 History
	3 Natural law
	3.1 Aristotle
	3.2 Thomas Aquinas
	3.3 School of Salamanca
	3.4 Lon Fuller
	3.5 John Finnis



	4 Analytic jurisprudence
	4.1 Historical school
	4.2 Sociological jurisprudence
	4.3 Legal positivism
	4.3.1 Thomas Hobbes
	4.3.2 Bentham and Austin
	4.3.3 Hans Kelsen
	4.3.4 H. L. A. Hart
	4.3.5 Joseph Raz



	4.4 Legal realism
	4.5 Critical legal studies
	4.6 Critical rationalism
	4.7 Legal interpretivism
	4.8 Therapeutic jurisprudence



	5 Normative jurisprudence
	5.1 Virtue jurisprudence
	5.2 Deontology
	5.3 Utilitarianism
	5.4 John Rawls



	6 See also
	7 Notes
	8 References
	9 Further reading
	10 External links





Etymology[edit]

The English word is derived from the Latin, iurisprudentia.[6] Iuris is the genitive form of ius meaning law, and prudentia meaning prudence (also: discretion, foresight, forethought, circumspection). It refers to the exercise of good judgment, common sense, and caution, especially in the conduct of practical matters.  The word first appeared in written English[7] in 1628, at a time when the word prudence meant knowledge of, or skill in, a matter. It may have entered English via the French jurisprudence, which appeared earlier.


History[edit]

Ancient Indian jurisprudence is mentioned in various Dharmaśāstra texts, starting with the Dharmasutra of Bhodhayana.[8]

In Ancient China, the Daoists, Confucians, and Legalists all had competing theories of jurisprudence.[9]

Jurisprudence in Ancient Rome had its origins with the (periti)—experts in the jus mos maiorum (traditional law), a body of oral laws and customs.

Praetors established a working body of laws by judging whether or not singular cases were capable of being prosecuted either by the edicta, the annual pronunciation of prosecutable offense, or in extraordinary situations, additions made to the edicta. An iudex would then prescribe a remedy according to the facts of the case.

The sentences of the iudex were supposed to be simple interpretations of the traditional customs, but—apart from considering what traditional customs applied in each case—soon developed a more equitable interpretation, coherently adapting the law to newer social exigencies. The law was then adjusted with evolving institutiones (legal concepts), while remaining in the traditional mode. Praetors were replaced in the 3rd century BC by a laical body of prudentes. Admission to this body was conditional upon proof of competence or experience.

Under the Roman Empire, schools of law were created, and practice of the law became more academic. From the early Roman Empire to the 3rd century, a relevant body of literature was produced by groups of scholars, including the Proculians and Sabinians. The scientific nature of the studies was unprecedented in ancient times.

After the 3rd century, juris prudentia became a more bureaucratic activity, with few notable authors. It was during the Eastern Roman Empire (5th century) that legal studies were once again undertaken in depth, and it is from this cultural movement that Justinian's Corpus Juris Civilis was born.


Natural law[edit]

In its general sense, natural law theory may be compared to both state-of-nature law and general law understood on the basis of being analogous to the laws of physical science. Natural law is often contrasted to positive law which asserts law as the product of human activity and human volition.

Another approach to natural-law jurisprudence generally asserts that human law must be in response to compelling reasons for action. There are two readings of the natural-law jurisprudential stance.


	The strong natural law thesis holds that if a human law fails to be in response to compelling reasons, then it is not properly a "law" at all. This is captured, imperfectly, in the famous maxim: lex iniusta non-est lex (an unjust law is no law at all).
	The weak natural law thesis holds that if a human law fails to be in response to compelling reasons, then it can still be called a "law", but it must be recognised as a defective law.


Notions of an objective moral order, external to human legal systems, underlie natural law. What is right or wrong can vary according to the interests one is focused on. John Finnis, one of the most important of modern natural lawyers,[10] has argued that the maxim "an unjust law is no law at all" is a poor guide to the classical Thomist position.

Strongly related to theories of natural law are classical theories of justice, beginning in the West with Plato's Republic.


Aristotle[edit]

  
Aristotle, by Francesco Hayez



Aristotle is often said to be the father of natural law.[11] Like his philosophical forefathers Socrates and Plato, Aristotle posited the existence of natural justice or natural right (dikaion physikon, δικαίον φυσικόν, Latin ius naturale). His association with natural law is largely due to how he was interpreted by Thomas Aquinas.[12] This was based on Aquinas' conflation of natural law and natural right, the latter of which Aristotle posits in Book V of the Nicomachean Ethics (Book IV of the Eudemian Ethics). Aquinas's influence was such as to affect a number of early translations of these passages,[13] though more recent translations render them more literally.[14]

Aristotle's theory of justice is bound up in his idea of the golden mean. Indeed, his treatment of what he calls "political justice" derives from his discussion of "the just" as a moral virtue derived as the mean between opposing vices, just like every other virtue he describes.[15] His longest discussion of his theory of justice occurs in Nicomachean Ethics and begins by asking what sort of mean a just act is. He argues that the term "justice" actually refers to two different but related ideas: general justice and particular justice.[16][17] When a person's actions toward others are completely virtuous in all matters, Aristotle calls them "just" in the sense of "general justice"; as such, this idea of justice is more or less coextensive with virtue.[18] "Particular" or "partial justice", by contrast, is the part of "general justice" or the individual virtue that is concerned with treating others equitably.[17]

Aristotle moves from this unqualified discussion of justice to a qualified view of political justice, by which he means something close to the subject of modern jurisprudence. Of political justice, Aristotle argues that it is partly derived from nature and partly a matter of convention.[19] This can be taken as a statement that is similar to the views of modern natural law theorists. But it must also be remembered that Aristotle is describing a view of morality, not a system of law, and therefore his remarks as to nature are about the grounding of the morality enacted as law, not the laws themselves.

The best evidence of Aristotle's having thought there was a natural law comes from the Rhetoric, where Aristotle notes that, aside from the "particular" laws that each people has set up for itself, there is a "common" law that is according to nature.[20] The context of this remark, however, suggests only that Aristotle thought that it could be rhetorically advantageous to appeal to such a law, especially when the "particular" law of one's own city was adverse to the case being made, not that there actually was such a law.[21] Aristotle, moreover, considered certain candidates for a universally valid, natural law to be wrong.[22] Aristotle's theoretical paternity of the natural law tradition is consequently disputed.[23]


Thomas Aquinas[edit]

Main articles: Thomas Aquinas and Treatise on Law

  
Thomas Aquinas was the most influential Western medieval legal scholar.



Thomas Aquinas is the foremost classical 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 Theologiae. One of the thirty-five Doctors of the Church, he is considered by many Catholics to be the Church's greatest theologian. Consequently, many institutions of learning have been named after him.

Aquinas distinguished four kinds of law: eternal, natural, divine, and human:


	Eternal law refers to divine reason, known only to God. It is God's plan for the universe. Man needs this plan, for without it he would totally lack direction.
	Natural law is the "participation" in the eternal law by rational human creatures, and is discovered by reason
	Divine law is revealed in the scriptures and is God's positive law for mankind
	Human law is supported by reason and enacted for the common good.[24]


Natural law is based on "first principles":[25]


... 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 ...


The desires to live and to procreate are counted by Aquinas among those basic (natural) human values on which all other human values are based.


School of Salamanca[edit]

Main articles: School of Salamanca and ius gentium

Francisco de Vitoria was perhaps the first to develop a theory of ius gentium (the rights of peoples), and thus is an important figure in the transition to modernity. He extrapolated his ideas of legitimate sovereign power to international affairs, concluding that such affairs ought to be determined by forms respecting of the rights of all and that the common good of the world should take precedence before the good of any single state. This meant that relations between states ought to pass from being justified by force to being justified by law and justice. Some scholars have upset the standard account of the origins of International law, which emphasises the seminal text De iure belli ac pacis by Hugo Grotius, and argued for Vitoria and, later, Suárez's importance as forerunners and, potentially, founders of the field.[26] Others, such as Koskenniemi, have argued that none of these humanist and scholastic thinkers can be understood to have founded international law in the modern sense, instead placing its origins in the post-1870 period.[27]

Francisco Suárez, regarded as among the greatest scholastics after Aquinas, subdivided the concept of ius gentium. Working with already well-formed categories, he carefully distinguished ius inter gentes from ius intra gentes. Ius inter gentes (which corresponds to modern international law) was something common to the majority of countries, although, being positive law, not natural law, it was not necessarily universal. On the other hand, ius intra gentes, or civil law, is specific to each nation.


Lon Fuller[edit]

Main article: Lon L. Fuller

Writing after World War II, Lon L. Fuller defended a secular and procedural form of natural law. He emphasised that the (natural) law must meet certain formal requirements (such as being impartial and publicly knowable). To the extent that an institutional system of social control falls short of these requirements, Fuller argued, we are less inclined to recognise it as a system of law, or to give it our respect. Thus, the law must have a morality that goes beyond the societal rules under which laws are made.


John Finnis[edit]

Main article: John Finnis

Sophisticated positivist and natural law theories sometimes resemble each other and may have certain points in common. Identifying a particular theorist as a positivist or a natural law theorist sometimes involves matters of emphasis and degree, and the particular influences on the theorist's work. The natural law theorists of the distant past, such as Aquinas and John Locke made no distinction between analytic and normative jurisprudence, while modern natural law theorists, such as John Finnis, who claim to be positivists, still argue that law is moral by nature. In his book Natural Law and Natural Rights (1980, 2011), John Finnis provides a restatement of natural law doctrine.[28]


Analytic jurisprudence[edit]

Main article: Analytic jurisprudence

Analytic, or "clarificatory", jurisprudence means taking a neutral point of view and using descriptive language when referring to various aspects of legal systems. This was a philosophical development that rejected natural law's fusing of what law is and what it ought to be.[4] David Hume argued, in A Treatise of Human Nature,[29] that people invariably slip from describing what the world is to asserting that we therefore ought to follow a particular course of action. But as a matter of pure logic, one cannot conclude that we ought to do something merely because something is the case. So analysing and clarifying the way the world is must be treated as a strictly separate question from normative and evaluative questions of what ought to be done.

The most important questions of analytic jurisprudence are: "What are laws?"; "What is the law?"; "What is the relationship between law and power/sociology?"; and "What is the relationship between law and morality?" Legal positivism is the dominant theory, although there is a growing number of critics who offer their own interpretations.


Historical school[edit]

Historical jurisprudence came to prominence during the debate on the proposed codification of German law. In his book On the Vocation of Our Age for Legislation and Jurisprudence,[30] Friedrich Carl von Savigny argued that Germany did not have a legal language that would support codification because the traditions, customs, and beliefs of the German people did not include a belief in a code. Historicists believe that law originates with society.


Sociological jurisprudence[edit]

Main article: Sociology of Law

An effort to systematically inform jurisprudence from sociological insights developed from the beginning of the twentieth century, as sociology began to establish itself as a distinct social science, especially in the United States and in continental Europe. In Germany, Austria and France, the work of the "free law" theorists (e.g. Ernst Fuchs, Hermann Kantorowicz, Eugen Ehrlich and Francois Geny) encouraged the use of sociological insights in the development of legal and juristic theory. The most internationally influential advocacy for a "sociological jurisprudence" occurred in the United States, where, throughout the first half of the twentieth century, Roscoe Pound, for many years the Dean of Harvard Law School, used this term to characterise his legal philosophy. In the United States, many later writers followed Pound's lead or developed distinctive approaches to sociological jurisprudence. In Australia, Julius Stone strongly defended and developed Pound's ideas.  In the 1930s, a significant split between the sociological jurists and the American legal realists emerged. In the second half of the twentieth century, sociological jurisprudence as a distinct movement declined as jurisprudence came more strongly under the influence of analytical legal philosophy; but with increasing criticism of dominant orientations of legal philosophy in English-speaking countries in the present century, it has attracted renewed interest. Increasingly, its contemporary focus is on providing theoretical resources for jurists to aid their understanding of new types of regulation (for example, the diverse kinds of developing transnational law) and the increasingly important interrelations of law and culture, especially in multicultural Western societies.[31]


Legal positivism[edit]

Main article: Legal positivism

Legal positivism is the view that the content of law is dependent on social facts and that a legal system's existence is not constrained by morality.[32] Within legal positivism, theorists agree that law's content is a product of social facts, but theorists disagree whether law's validity can be explained by incorporating moral values.[33] Legal positivists who argue against the incorporation of moral values to explain law's validity are labeled exclusive (or hard) legal positivists. Joseph Raz's legal positivism is an example of exclusive legal positivism. Legal positivists who argue that law's validity can be explained by incorporating moral values are labeled inclusive (or soft) legal positivists. The legal positivist theories of H. L. A. Hart and Jules Coleman are examples of inclusive legal positivism.[34]


Thomas Hobbes[edit]

Main article: Thomas Hobbes

Hobbes was a social contractarian[35] and believed that the law had peoples' tacit consent. He believed that society was formed from a state of nature to protect people from the state of war that would exist otherwise. In Leviathan, Hobbes argues that without an ordered society life would be "solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short."[36] It is commonly said that Hobbes's views on human nature were influenced by his times. The English Civil War and the Cromwellian dictatorship had taken place; and, in reacting to that, Hobbes felt that absolute authority vested in a monarch, whose subjects obeyed the law, was the basis of a civilized society.


Bentham and Austin[edit]

  
Bentham's utilitarian theories remained dominant in law until the twentieth century.



Main articles: Jeremy Bentham and John Austin (legal philosopher)

John Austin and Jeremy Bentham were early legal positivists who sought to provide a descriptive account of law that describes the law as it is. Austin explained the descriptive focus for legal positivism by saying, "The existence of law is one thing; its merit and demerit another. Whether it be or be not is one enquiry; whether it be or be not conformable to an assumed standard, is a different enquiry."[37] For Austin and Bentham, a society is governed by a sovereign who has de facto authority. Through the sovereign's authority come laws, which for Austin and Bentham are commands backed by sanctions for non-compliance. Along with Hume, Bentham was an early and staunch supporter of the utilitarian concept, and was an avid prison reformer, advocate for democracy, and firm atheist. Bentham's views about law and jurisprudence 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".[38] H. L. A. Hart criticized Austin and Bentham's early legal positivism because the command theory failed to account for individual's compliance with the law.


Hans Kelsen[edit]

Main article: Hans Kelsen

Hans Kelsen is considered one of the prominent jurists of the 20th century and has been highly influential in Europe and Latin America, although less so in common-law countries. His Pure Theory of Law describes law as "binding norms", while at the same time refusing to evaluate those norms. That is, "legal science" is to be separated from "legal politics". Central to the Pure Theory of Law is the notion of a "basic norm" (Grundnorm)'—a hypothetical norm, presupposed by the jurist, from which all "lower" norms in the hierarchy of a legal system, beginning with constitutional law, are understood to derive their authority or the extent to which they are binding. Kelsen contends that the extent to which legal norms are binding, their specifically "legal" character, can be understood without tracing it ultimately to some suprahuman source such as God, personified Nature or—of great importance in his time—a personified State or Nation.


H. L. A. Hart[edit]

Main article: H. L. A. Hart

In the English-speaking world, the most influential legal positivist of the twentieth century was H. L. A. Hart, professor of jurisprudence at Oxford University. Hart argued that the law should be understood as a system of social rules. In The Concept of Law, Hart rejected Kelsen's views that sanctions were essential to law and that a normative social phenomenon, like law, cannot be grounded in non-normative social facts.

Hart claimed that law is the union primary rules and secondary rules.[39] Primary rules require individuals to act or not act in certain ways and create duties for the governed to obey.[40] Secondary rules are rules that confer authority to create new primary rules or modify existing ones.[40] Secondary rules are divided into rules of adjudication (how to resolve legal disputes), rules of change (how laws are amended), and the rule of recognition (how laws are identified as valid). The validity of a legal system comes from the "rule of recognition", which is a customary practice of officials (especially barristers and judges) who identify certain acts and decisions as sources of law. In 1981, Neil MacCormick[41] wrote a pivotal book on Hart (second edition published in 2008), which further refined and offered some important criticisms that led MacCormick to develop his own theory (the best example of which is his Institutions of Law, 2007). Other important critiques include those of Ronald Dworkin, John Finnis, and Joseph Raz.

In recent years, debates on 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 is associated with the view that the legal validity of a norm can never depend on its moral correctness. A second school is labeled "inclusive legal positivism", a major proponent of which is Wil Waluchow, and is associated with the view that moral considerations may, but do not necessarily, determine the legal validity of a norm.


Joseph Raz[edit]

Main article: Joseph Raz

Joseph Raz's theory of legal positivism argues against the incorporation of moral values to explain law's validity. In Raz's 1979 book The Authority of Law, he criticised what he called the "weak social thesis" to explain law.[42] He formulates the weak social thesis as "(a) Sometimes the identification of some laws turn on moral arguments, but also with, (b) In all legal systems the identification of some law turns on moral argument."[43] Raz argues that law's authority is identifiable purely through social sources, without reference to moral reasoning.[43] This view he calls "the sources thesis".[44] Raz suggests that any categorisation of rules beyond their role as authority is better left to sociology than to jurisprudence.[45] Some philosophers used to contend that positivism was the theory that held that there was "no necessary connection" between law and morality; but influential contemporary positivists—including Joseph Raz, John Gardner, and Leslie Green—reject that view. As Raz points out, it is a necessary truth that there are vices that a legal system cannot possibly have (for example, it cannot commit rape or murder).


Legal realism[edit]

Main article: Legal realism

  
Oliver Wendell Holmes was a self-styled legal realist.



Legal realism is the view that a theory of law should be descriptive and account for the reasons why judges decide cases as they do.[46] Legal realism had some affinities with the sociology of law and sociological jurisprudence. The essential tenet of legal realism is that all law is made by humans and thus should account for reasons besides legal rules that led to a legal decision.

There are two separate schools of legal realism: American legal realism and Scandinavian legal realism. American legal realism grew out of the writings of Oliver Wendell Holmes. At the start of Holmes's The Common Law, he claims that "[t]he life of the law has not been logic: it has been experience".[47] This view was a reaction to legal formalism that was popular the time due to the Christopher Columbus Langdell.[48] Holmes's writings on jurisprudence also laid the foundations for the predictive theory of law. In his article "The Path of the Law", Holmes argues that "the object of [legal] study...is prediction, the prediction of the incidence of the public force through the instrumentality of the courts."[49]

For the American legal realists of the early twentieth century, legal realism sought to describe the way judges decide cases. For legal realists such as Jerome Frank, judges start with the facts before them and then move to legal principles. Before legal realism, theories of jurisprudence turned this method around where judges were thought to begin with legal principles and then look to facts.

It has become common today to identify Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr., as the main precursor of American Legal 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 judges who are able to shape the outcome of cases based on their personal values or policy choices.[50]

The Scandinavian school of legal realism argued that law can be explained through the empirical methods used by social scientists.[51] Prominent Scandinavian legal realists are Alf Ross, Axel Hägerström, and Karl Olivecrona. Scandinavian legal realists also took a naturalist approach to law.[52]

Despite its decline in popularity, legal realism continues to influence a wide spectrum of jurisprudential schools today, including critical legal studies, feminist legal theory, critical race theory, sociology of law, and law and economics.[53]


Critical legal studies[edit]

Critical legal studies are a new theory of jurisprudence that has developed since the 1970s. The theory can generally be traced to American legal realism and is considered "the first movement in legal theory and legal scholarship in the United States to have espoused a committed Left political stance and perspective".[54] It holds that the law is largely contradictory, and can be best analyzed as an expression of the policy goals of a dominant social group.[55]


Critical rationalism[edit]

Karl Popper originated the theory of critical rationalism. According to Reinhold Zippelius many advances in law and jurisprudence take place by operations of critical rationalism. He writes, "daß die Suche nach dem Begriff des Rechts, nach seinen Bezügen zur Wirklichkeit und nach der Gerechtigkeit experimentierend voranschreitet, indem wir Problemlösungen versuchsweise entwerfen, überprüfen und verbessern" (that we empirically search for solutions to problems, which harmonise fairly with reality, by projecting, testing and improving the solutions).[56]


Legal interpretivism[edit]

Main article: Interpretivism (legal)

American legal philosopher Ronald Dworkin's legal theory attacks legal positivists that separate law's content from morality.[57] In his book Law's Empire,[58] Dworkin argued that law is an "interpretive" concept that requires barristers to find the best-fitting and most just solution to a legal dispute, given their constitutional traditions. According to him, law is not entirely based on social facts, but includes the best moral justification for the institutional facts and practices that form a society's legal tradition. It follows from Dworkin's view that one cannot know whether a society has a legal system in force, or what any of its laws are, until one knows some truths about the moral justifications of the social and political practices of that society. It is consistent with Dworkin's view—in contrast with the views of legal positivists or legal realists—that no-one in a society may know what its laws are, because no-one may know the best moral justification for its practices.

Interpretation, according to Dworkin's "integrity theory of law", has two dimensions. To count as an interpretation, the reading of a text must meet the criterion of "fit". Of those interpretations that fit, however, Dworkin maintains that the correct interpretation is the one that portrays the practices of the community in their best light, or makes them "the best that they can be". But many writers have doubted whether there is a single best moral justification for the complex practices of any given community, and others have doubted whether, even if there is, it should be counted as part of the law of that community.


Therapeutic jurisprudence[edit]

Main article: Therapeutic jurisprudence

Consequences of the operation of legal rules or legal procedures—or of the behavior of legal actors (such as lawyers and judges)—may be either beneficial (therapeutic) or harmful (anti-therapeutic) to people. Therapeutic jurisprudence ("TJ") studies law as a social force (or agent) and uses social science methods and data to study the extent to which a legal rule or practice affects the psychological well-being of the people it impacts.[59]


Normative jurisprudence[edit]

Main article: Political philosophy

In addition to the question, "What is law?", legal philosophy is also concerned with normative, 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 punishment, 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 discussed below.


Virtue jurisprudence[edit]

  
Plato (left) and Aristotle (right), a detail of The School of Athens



Main article: 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 development of virtuous character in citizens. Historically, this approach has been mainly associated with Aristotle or Thomas Aquinas. Contemporary virtue jurisprudence is inspired by philosophical work on virtue ethics.


Deontology[edit]

Main article: Deontological ethics

Deontology is the "theory of duty or moral obligation".[60] The philosopher Immanuel Kant formulated one influential deontological theory of law. He argued that any rule we follow must be able to be universally applied, i.e. we must be willing for everyone to follow that rule. A contemporary deontological approach can be found in the work of the legal philosopher Ronald Dworkin.


Utilitarianism[edit]

  
Mill believed law should create happiness.



Main article: Utilitarianism

See also: Lysander Spooner

Utilitarianism is the view that the laws should be crafted so as to produce the best consequences for the greatest number of people. Historically, utilitarian thinking about law has been associated with the philosopher Jeremy Bentham. John Stuart Mill was a pupil of Bentham's and was the torch bearer for utilitarian philosophy throughout the late nineteenth century.[61] In contemporary legal theory, the utilitarian approach is frequently championed by scholars who work in the law and economics tradition.[53]


John Rawls[edit]

Main articles: John Rawls and A Theory of Justice

John Rawls was an American philosopher; a professor of political philosophy at Harvard University; and author of A Theory of Justice (1971), Political Liberalism, Justice as Fairness: 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 method called "original position" to ask us which principles of justice we would choose to regulate the basic institutions 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 argued from this "original position" that we would choose exactly the same political liberties for everyone, like freedom of speech, the right to vote, and so on. Also, we would choose a system where there is only inequality because that produces incentives enough for the economic well-being of all society, especially the poorest. This is Rawls's famous "difference principle". Justice is fairness, in the sense that the fairness of the original position of choice guarantees the fairness of the principles chosen in that position.

There are many other normative approaches to the philosophy of law, including critical legal studies and libertarian theories of law.


See also[edit]


	Analytical jurisprudence
	Artificial intelligence and law
	Brocard (law)
	Cautelary jurisprudence
	Comparative law
	Constitution
	Constitutional law
	Constitutionalism
	Constitutional economics
	Critical legal studies
	Critical race theory
	Critical rationalism
	Defeasible reasoning
	Divine law
	Feminist jurisprudence
	Feminist legal theory
	Fiqh
	International legal theory
	Judicial activism
	Justice
	Law and economics
	Law and literature
	Legal formalism
	Legal history
	Legalism
	Legal pluralism
	Legal positivism
	Legal realism
	Libertarian theories of law
	Living Constitution
	Originalism
	Natural law
	New legal realism
	Political jurisprudence
	Postmodernist jurisprudence
	Publius Juventius Celsus
	Philosophy of law
	Rule of law
	Rule according to higher law
	Sociological jurisprudence
	Sociology of law
	Strict interpretation
	Virtue jurisprudence




Notes[edit]


	^ LII Staff (6 August 2007). "Jurisprudence". LII / Legal Information Institute. Retrieved 22 September 2018.

	^ 
Garner, Bryan A. (2009). Black's law dictionary (9th ed.). Saint Paul, Minnesota, USA: West. pp. Jurisprudence entry. ISBN 978-0-314-19949-2.

	^ a b Shiner, "Philosophy of Law", Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy

	^ a b See H L A Hart, 'Positivism and the Separation of Law and Morals' (1958) 71 Harv. L. Rev. 593

	^ Soper, "Legal Positivism", Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy

	^ 
"jurisprudence - Wiktionary". en.wiktionary.org. Retrieved 24 May 2019.

	^ Oxford English Dictionary, 2nd edition 1989

	^ 
Katju, Markandey (27 November 2010). "Ancient Indian Jurisprudence" (PDF). Banaras Hindu University. Retrieved 11 April 2019.

	^ 
Chang, Wejen (Spring 2010). "Classical Chinese Jurisprudence and the Development of the Chinese Legal System". Tsinghua China Law Review. 2 (2). Retrieved 27 June 2019.

	^ 
The Blackwell Guide to the Philosophy of Law and Legal Theory. Golding, Martin P. (Martin Philip), 1930-, Edmundson, William A. (William Atkins), 1948-, Credo Reference. Malden, Mass.: Blackwell Pub. 2013. ISBN 9781782683131. OCLC 841495455.CS1 maint: others (link)

	^ Shellens, "Aristotle on Natural Law."

	^ Jaffa, Thomism and Aristotelianism.

	^ H. Rackham, trans., Nicomachean Ethics, Loeb Classical Library; J. A. K. Thomson, trans. (revised by Hugh Tedennick), Nicomachean Ethics, Penguin Classics.

	^ Joe Sachs, trans., Nicomachean Ethics, Focus Publishing

	^ "Nicomachean Ethics" Bk. II ch. 6

	^ Terrence Irwin, trans. Nicomachean Ethics, 2nd Ed., Hackett Publishing

	^ a b Nicomachean Ethics, Bk. V, ch. 3

	^ "Nicomachean Ethics", Bk. V, ch. 1

	^ Nicomachean Ethics, Bk. V, ch. 7.

	^ Rhetoric 1373b2–8.

	^ Shellens, "Aristotle on Natural Law," 75–81

	^ "Natural Law," International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences.

	^ 
"Greek Theory of Natural Law".

	^ Louis Pojman, Ethics (Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing Company, 1995)

	^ 
"Summa Theologica".

	^ e.g. James Brown Scott, cited in Cavallar, The Rights of Strangers: theories of international hospitality, the global community, and political justice since Vitoria, p.164

	^ Koskenniemi: "International Law and raison d'état: Rethinking the Prehistory of International Law", in Kingsbury & Strausmann, The Roman Foundations of the Law of Nations, pp. 297–339

	^ 
Finnis, John (1980). Natural Law and Natural Rights. Oxford: Clarendon Press. pp. 18–19.

	^ David Hume, A Treatise of Human Nature (1739) Etext Archived 20 August 2006 at the Wayback Machine

	^ Friedrich Carl von Savigny, On the Vocation of Our Age for Legislation and Jurisprudence (Abraham A. Hayward trans., 1831)

	^ For full discussion see Cotterrell 2018

	^ 
Green, Leslie (Spring 2018). "Legal Positivism". The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

	^ 
Murphy, Mark C. (2006). Philosophy of law: the fundamentals. Malden, MA: Blackwell. pp. 132–135. ISBN 9781405129466. OCLC 62281976.

	^ 
Himma, Kenneth Einar. "Legal Positivism". The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved 31 May 2019.

	^ 
Martinich, A.P. (2013). Hobbes. New York: Routledge. p. 54. ISBN 9781135180799.

	^ 
Hobbes, Thomas (1668). "Of the Natural Condition of Mankind".  In Curley, Edwin (ed.). Leviathan: With selected variants from the Latin edition of 1668. Hackett Publishing. p. 76. ISBN 9781603844857.

	^ 
Austin, John (1832). The province of jurisprudence determined ; and, the uses of the study of jurisprudence. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett Pub. p. 184. ISBN 0872204332. OCLC 39539515.

	^ John Austin, The Providence of Jurisprudence Determined (1831)

	^ 
Hart, H. L. A. (2012). The Concept of Law (3rd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp. 79–99.

	^ a b 
Hart, H. L. A. (2012). The Concept of Law (3rd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press. p. 81.

	^ 
"The University of Edinburgh". Archived from the original on 1 June 2006. Retrieved 24 May 2006.

	^ 
Raz, Joseph (1979). The Authority of Law: Essays on Law and Morality. Oxford: Oxford University Press. p. 45. ISBN 9780199573561.

	^ a b 
Raz, Joseph (1979). The Authority of Law: Essays on Law and Morality. Oxford: Oxford University Press. p. 47. ISBN 9780199573561.

	^ 
Raz, Joseph (1979). The Authority of Law: Essays on Law and Morality. Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp. 47–48. ISBN 9780199573561.

	^ ch. 2, Joseph Raz, The Authority of Law (1979)

	^ 
Leiter, Brian (December 1997). "Rethinking Legal Realism: Toward a Naturalized Jurisprudence". Texas Law Review. 76: 268.

	^ 
Holmes Jr., O.W. (1881). The Common Law. Boston: Little, Brown, and Co. p. 1.

	^ 
Langdell, C.C. (1871). A Selection of Cases on the Law of Contracts. Boston: Little, Brown, and Co. pp. vi.

	^ 
Holmes, O.W. (1897). "The Path of the Law". Harvard Law Review. 10 (8): 457–478. doi:10.2307/1322028. JSTOR 1322028.

	^ "Jurisprudence". West's Encyclopedia of American Law. Ed. Jeffrey Lehman, Shirelle
Phelps. Detroit: Thomson/Gale, 2005.

	^ 
Schauer, Frederick (2009). Thinking Like a Lawyer. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. pp. 124 n.1. ISBN 9780674032705.

	^ 
Olivecrona, Karl (1971). Law as Fact. London: Stevens & Sons. pp. vii. ISBN 978-0420432506.

	^ a b Kristoffel Grechenig & Martin Gelter, The Transatlantic Divergence in Legal Thought: American Law and Economics vs. German Doctrinalism, Hastings International and Comparative Law Review 2008, vol. 31, pp. 295–360.

	^ Alan Hunt, "The Theory of Critical Legal Studies," Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, Vol. 6, No. 1 (1986): 1-45, esp. 1, 5. See [1]. DOI, 10.1093/ojls/6.1.1.

	^ Moore, "Critical Legal Studies", Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy

	^ Reinhold Zippelius, Rechtsphilosophie, 6. Aufl. 2011 Vorwort.

	^ Brooks, "Review of Dworkin and His Critics with Replies by Dworkin", Modern Law Review, vol. 69 no. 6

	^ Ronald Dworkin, Law's Empire (1986) Harvard University Press

	^ 
Wexler, David B; Perlin, Michael L; Vols, Michel;  et al. (December 2016). "Editorial: Current Issues in Therapeutic Jurisprudence". QUT Law Review. 16 (3): 1–3. doi:10.5204/qutlr.v16i3.692. ISSN 2201-7275.

	^ Webster's New World Dictionary of the American Language, p. 378 (2d Coll. Ed. 1978).

	^ see, Utilitarianism Archived 5 May 2007 at the Wayback Machine at Metalibri Digital Library




References[edit]

	Hastings International and Comparative Law Review 2008, vol. 31, pp. 295–36.


Further reading[edit]

	
Austin, John (1831). The Province of Jurisprudence Determined.
	Cotterrell, R. (1995). Law's Community: Legal Theory in Sociological Perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
	Cotterrell, R. (2003). The Politics of Jurisprudence: A Critical Introduction to Legal Philosophy, 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
	Cotterrell, R. (2018). Sociological Jurisprudence: Juristic Thought and Social Inquiry. New York/London: Routledge.
	Freeman, M. D. A. (2014). Lloyd's Introduction to Jurisprudence. 9th ed. London: Sweet and Maxwell.
	
Hart, H. L. A. (1994) [1961]. The Concept of Law (2nd (with postscript) ed.). Oxford: Clarendon Press. ISBN 978-0-19-876122-8.
	Hartzler, H. Richard (1976). Justice, Legal Systems, and Social Structure. Port Washington, NY: Kennikat Press.
	
Engle, Eric (July 2010). Lex Naturalis, Ius Naturalis: Law as Positive Reasoning & Natural Rationality. Eric Engle. ISBN 978-0-9807318-4-2.
	Hutchinson, Allan C., ed. (1989). Critical Legal Studies. Totowa, NJ: Rowman & Littlefield.
	Kempin Jr., Frederick G. (1963). Legal History: Law and Social Change. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
	Llewellyn, Karl N. (1986). Karl N. Llewellyn on Legal Realism. Birmingham, AL: Legal Classics Library. (Contains penetrating classic "The Bramble Bush" on nature of law).
	Murphy, Cornelius F. (1977). Introduction to Law, Legal Process, and Procedure. St. Paul, MN: West Publishing.
	Rawls, John (1999). A Theory of Justice, revised ed. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. (Philosophical treatment of justice).
	Wacks, Raymond (2009). Understanding Jurisprudence: An Introduction to Legal Theory Oxford University Press.
	Washington, Ellis (2002). The Inseparability of Law and Morality: Essays on Law, Race, Politics and Religion University Press of America.
	Washington, Ellis (2013). The Progressive Revolution, 2007–08 Writings-Vol. 1; 2009 Writings-Vol. 2, Liberal Fascism through the Ages University Press of America.
	Zinn, Howard (1990). Declarations of Independence: Cross-Examining American Ideology. New York: Harper Collins Publishers.
	Zippelius, Reinhold (2011). Rechtsphilosophie, 6th ed. Munich: C.H. Beck. 
ISBN 978-3-406-61191-9
	Zippelius, Reinhold (2012). Das Wesen des Rechts (The Concept of Law), an introduction to Legal Theory, 6th ed., Stuttgart: W. Kohlhammer. 
ISBN 978-3-17-022355-4
	Zippelius, Reinhold (2008). Introduction to German Legal Methods (Juristische Methodenlehre), translated from the tenth German Edition by Kirk W. Junker, P. Matthew Roy. Durham: Carolina Academic Press.
	Heinze, Eric, The Concept of Injustice (Routledge, 2013)
	Pillai, P. S. A. (2016). Jurisprudence and Legal Theory, 3rd Edition, Reprinted 2016: Eastern Book Company. 
ISBN 978-93-5145-326-0


External links[edit]

		Look up jurisprudence in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.


	John Witte Jr.: A Brief Biography of Dooyeweerd, based on Hendrik van Eikema Hommes, Inleiding tot de Wijsbegeerte van Herman Dooyeweerd (The Hague, 1982; pp. 1–4, 132). Redeemer University College
	LII Law about ... Jurisprudence.
	[2]Lircocervo.it "L'Ircocervo. Rivista elettronica italiana di metodologia giuridica, teoria generale del diritto e dottrina dello stato"
	The Case of the Speluncean Explorers: Nine New Opinions, by Peter Suber (Routledge, 1998.) Lon Fuller's classic of jurisprudence brought up to date 50 years later.
	The Roman Law Library, incl. Responsa prudentium by Professor Yves Lassard and Alexandr Koptev.
	Evgeny Pashukanis - General Theory of Law and Marxism.
	Internet Encyclopedia: Philosophy of Law.
	The Opticon: Online Repository of Materials covering Spectrum of U.S. Jurisprudence.
	Foundation for Law, Justice and Society
	Bibliography on the Philosophy of Law. Peace Palace Library
	Norwegian Association for Legal Philosophy




		v
	t
	e


Jurisprudence

	Legal theory	
	Critical legal studies
	Comparative law
	Economic analysis
	Legal norms
	International legal theory
	Legal history
	Philosophy of law
	Sociology of law




	Philosophers	
	Alexy
	Allan
	Aquinas
	Aristotle
	Austin
	Beccaria
	Bentham
	Betti
	Bickel
	Blackstone
	Bobbio
	Bork
	Brożek
	Cardozo
	Castanheira Neves
	Chafee
	Coleman
	Del Vecchio
	Durkheim
	Dworkin
	Ehrlich
	Feinberg
	Fineman
	Finnis
	Frank
	Fuller
	Gardner
	George
	Green
	Grisez
	Grotius
	Gurvitch
	Habermas
	Han
	Hart
	Hegel
	Hobbes
	Hohfeld
	Hägerström
	Jellinek
	Jhering
	Kant
	Kelsen
	Köchler
	Kramer
	Llewellyn
	Lombardía
	Luhmann
	Lundstedt
	Lyons
	MacCormick
	Marx
	Nussbaum
	Olivecrona
	Pashukanis
	Perelman
	Petrażycki
	Pontes de Miranda
	Posner
	Pound
	Puchta
	Pufendorf
	Radbruch
	Rawls
	Raz
	Reale
	Reinach
	Renner
	Ross
	Rumi
	Savigny
	Scaevola
	Schauer
	Schmitt
	Shang
	Simmonds
	Somló
	Suárez
	Tribe
	Unger
	Voegelin
	Waldron
	Walzer
	Weber
	Wronkowska
	Ziembiński
	Znamierowski




	Theories	
	Analytical jurisprudence
	Deontological ethics
	Fundamental theory of Catholic canon law
	Interpretivism
	Legalism
	Legal moralism
	Legal positivism
	Legal realism
	Libertarian theories of law
	Natural law
	Paternalism
	Utilitarianism
	Virtue jurisprudence




	Concepts	
	Dharma
	Fa
	Judicial interpretation
	Justice
	Legal system
	Li
	Rational-legal authority
	Usul al-Fiqh




	Related	
	Law
	Political philosophy
	Index




	
	 Category
	 Law portal
	Philosophy portal
	 WikiProject Law
	WikiProject Philosophy
	changes







	
	v
	t
	e


Law

	Core subjects	
	Administrative law
	Civil law
	Constitutional law
	Contract
	Criminal law
	Deed
	Equity
	Evidence
	International law
	Law of obligations
	Private law
	Procedure
	Civil
	Criminal


	Property law
	Public law
	Restitution
	Statutory law
	Tort




	Other subjects	
	Agricultural law
	Aviation law
	Amnesty law
	Banking law
	Bankruptcy
	Commercial law
	Competition law
	Conflict of laws
	Construction law
	Consumer protection
	Corporate law
	Cyberlaw
	Election law
	Energy law
	Entertainment law
	Environmental law
	Family law
	Financial law
	Financial regulation
	Health law
	History of the legal profession
	History of the American legal profession
	Immigration law
	Intellectual property
	International criminal law
	International human rights
	International slavery laws
	Jurimetrics
	Labour
	Law of war
	Legal archaeology
	Legal fiction
	Maritime law
	Media law
	Military law
	Nationality law
	Probate
	Estate
	Will and testament


	Product liability
	Public international law
	Space law
	Sports law
	Tax law
	Transport law
	Trust law
	Unenforced law
	Women in law




	Sources of law	
	Charter
	Code
	Constitution
	Custom
	Divine right
	Divine law


	Human rights
	Natural law
	Natural and legal rights


	Case law
	Precedent






	Law making	
	Ballot measure
	Codification
	Decree
	Edict
	Executive order
	Proclamation


	Legislation
	Delegated legislation
	Regulation
	Rulemaking


	Promulgation
	Repeal
	Treaty
	Concordat


	Statutory law
	Statute
	Act of Parliament
	Act of Congress (US)






	Legal systems	
	Civil law
	Common law
	Chinese law
	Legal pluralism
	Religious law
	Canon law
	Catholic canon law


	Hindu law
	Jain law
	Jewish law
	Sharia


	Roman law
	Socialist law
	Statutory law
	Xeer
	Yassa




	Legal theory	
	Anarchist
	Contract theory
	Critical legal studies
	Comparative law
	Feminist
	Fundamental theory of Catholic canon law
	Law and economics
	Legal formalism
	History
	Libertarian
	International legal theory
	Principle of legality
	Principle of typicality
	Rule of law
	Sociology




	Jurisprudence	
	Adjudication
	Administration of justice
	Criminal justice
	Court-martial
	Dispute resolution
	Fiqh
	Lawsuit/Litigation
	Legal opinion
	Legal remedy
	Judge
	Justice of the peace
	Magistrate


	Judgment
	Judicial review
	Jurisdiction
	Jury
	Justice
	Practice of law
	Attorney
	Barrister
	Counsel
	Lawyer
	Legal representation
	Prosecutor
	Solicitor


	Question of fact
	Question of law
	Trial
	Trial advocacy
	Trier of fact
	Verdict




	Legal institutions	
	Bureaucracy
	The bar
	The bench
	Civil society
	Court
	Court of equity
	Election commission
	Executive
	Judiciary
	Law enforcement
	Legal education
	Law school


	Legislature
	Military
	Police
	Political party
	Tribunal




	
	Category
	Index
	Outline
	Portal







	
	v
	t
	e


Social and political philosophy

	Ancient
philosophers	
	Aristotle
	Augustine
	Chanakya
	Cicero
	Confucius
	Han Fei
	Lactantius
	Laozi
	Mencius
	Mozi
	Origen
	Philo
	Plato
	Plutarch
	Polybius
	Shang
	Socrates
	Sun Tzu
	Tertullian
	Thucydides
	Valluvar
	Xenophon
	Xunzi




	Medieval
philosophers	
	Accursius
	Alpharabius
	Augustinus Triumphus
	Avempace
	Averroes
	Baldus
	Bartholomew
	Bartolus
	Bruni
	Dante
	Engelbert
	Gelasius
	al-Ghazali
	Giles
	Godfrey
	Gratian
	Gregory
	Hostiensis
	Ibn Khaldun
	Ibn Tufail
	John of Paris
	John of Salisbury
	Latini
	Maimonides
	Marsilius
	Nizam al-Mulk
	Photios
	Remigio
	Thomas Aquinas
	Wang
	William of Ockham




	Early modern
philosophers	
	Ammirato
	Beza
	Boétie
	Bodin
	Bossuet
	Botero
	Buchanan
	Calvin
	Cumberland
	Duplessis-Mornay
	Erasmus
	Filmer
	Grotius
	Guicciardini
	Harrington
	Hayashi
	Hobbes
	Hotman
	Huang
	James
	Leibniz
	Locke
	Luther
	Machiavelli
	Malebranche
	Mariana
	Milton
	Montaigne
	More
	Müntzer
	Naudé
	Pufendorf
	Rohan
	Sansovino
	Sidney
	Spinoza
	Suárez




	18th–19th-century
philosophers	
	Bakunin
	Bentham
	Bolingbroke
	Bonald
	Bosanquet
	Burke
	Comte
	Condorcet
	Constant
	Cortés
	Emerson
	Engels
	Fichte
	Fourier
	Franklin
	Godwin
	Hamann
	Hegel
	Herbert
	Herder
	Hume
	Jefferson
	Justi
	Kant
	political philosophy


	Kierkegaard
	Le Bon
	Le Play
	Madison
	Maistre
	Marx
	Mazzini
	Mill
	Montesquieu
	Möser
	Nietzsche
	Novalis
	Paine
	Renan
	Rousseau
	Royce
	Sade
	Schiller
	Smith
	Spencer
	Spedalieri
	Stirner
	Taine
	Thoreau
	Tocqueville
	Vico
	Vivekananda
	Voltaire




	20th–21st-century
philosophers	
	Adorno
	Ambedkar
	Arendt
	Aurobindo
	Aron
	Azurmendi
	Badiou
	Baudrillard
	Bauman
	Benoist
	Berlin
	Bernstein
	Butler
	Camus
	Chomsky
	De Beauvoir
	Debord
	Dewey
	Dmowski
	Du Bois
	Durkheim
	Dworkin
	Foucault
	Gandhi
	Gauthier
	Gehlen
	Gentile
	Gramsci
	Habermas
	Hayek
	Heidegger
	Irigaray
	Kautsky
	Kirk
	Koneczny
	Kropotkin
	Laclau
	Lenin
	Luxemburg
	Manent
	Mansfield
	Mao
	Marcuse
	Maritain
	Michels
	Mises
	Mou
	Mouffe
	Negri
	Niebuhr
	Nozick
	Nursî
	Oakeshott
	Ortega
	Pareto
	Pettit
	Plamenatz
	Polanyi
	Popper
	Qutb
	Radhakrishnan
	Rand
	Rawls
	Rothbard
	Russell
	Santayana
	Sartre
	Scanlon
	Schmitt
	Scruton
	Searle
	Shariati
	Simmel
	Simonović
	Skinner
	Sombart
	Sorel
	Spann
	Spooner
	Spirito
	Strauss
	Sun
	Taylor
	Tucker
	Walzer
	Weber
	Žižek




	Social theories	
	Anarchism
	Authoritarianism
	Collectivism
	Communism
	Communitarianism
	Conflict theories
	Confucianism
	Consensus theory
	Conservatism
	Contractualism
	Cosmopolitanism
	Culturalism
	Fascism
	Feminist political theory
	Gandhism
	Hindu nationalism (Hindutva)
	Individualism
	Islam
	Islamism
	Legalism
	Liberalism
	Libertarianism
	Mohism
	National liberalism
	Republicanism
	Social constructionism
	Social constructivism
	Social Darwinism
	Social determinism
	Socialism
	Utilitarianism




	Related articles	
	Jurisprudence
	Philosophy and economics
	Philosophy of education
	Philosophy of history
	Philosophy of love
	Philosophy of sex
	Philosophy of social science
	Political ethics
	Social epistemology
	Index




	
	Category







	
	v
	t
	e


Social sciences

	
	Outline
	History
	Index




	Primary	
	Anthropology (archaeology
	cultural
	linguistics
	social)
	Economics (microeconomics
	macroeconomics
	econometrics
	mathematical)
	History
	cultural
	auxiliary sciences
	economic
	human
	military
	political
	social


	Law (jurisprudence
	legal history
	legal systems
	public law
	private law)
	Political science (international relations
	comparative
	theory
	public policy)
	Psychology (abnormal
	cognitive
	developmental
	personality
	social)
	Sociology (criminology
	demography
	internet
	rural
	urban)




	Interdisciplinary	
	Administration (business
	public)
	Anthrozoology
	Area studies
	Business studies
	Cognitive science
	Communication studies
	Community studies
	Cultural studies
	Development studies
	Education
	Environmental (social science
	studies)
	Food studies
	Gender studies
	Global studies
	History of technology
	Human ecology
	Information science
	International studies
	Linguistics
	Media studies
	Philosophy of science (economics
	history
	psychology
	social science)
	Planning (land use
	regional
	urban)
	Political ecology
	Political economy
	Public health
	Regional science
	Science and technology studies
	Science studies
	historical
	Quantum social science


	Social work
	Vegan studies




	List	
	List of social science journals




	Other categorizations	
	Humanities
	Geisteswissenschaft
	Human science




	
	 Category
	 Commons
	 Society portal
	 Wikiversity







	Authority control 

	General	
	Integrated Authority File




	National libraries	
	United States
	Japan




	Other	
	Microsoft Academic














Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jurisprudence&oldid=1028346311"


		Categories: 	Jurisprudence
	Academic disciplines
	Law
	Legal ethics
	Philosophy of law
	Roman law
	Social philosophy
	Social sciences


Hidden categories: 	CS1 maint: others
	Webarchive template wayback links
	Articles with short description
	Short description is different from Wikidata
	Use dmy dates from July 2020
	Articles that may contain original research from June 2018
	All articles that may contain original research
	Articles needing additional references from June 2018
	All articles needing additional references
	Articles with multiple maintenance issues
	Wikipedia articles with GND identifiers
	Wikipedia articles with LCCN identifiers
	Wikipedia articles with NDL identifiers
	Wikipedia articles with MA identifiers




	




	





	Navigation menu

	
		
	
		Personal tools
	

	
			Not logged in
	Talk
	Contributions
	Create account
	Log in


		
	



		
			
	
		Namespaces
	

	
			Article
	Talk


		
	



			
	
	
		Variants
	

	
		

		
	



		

		
			
	
		Views
	

	
			Read
	Edit
	View history


		
	



			
	
	
		More
	

	
		

		
	



			
	
		Search
	

	
		
			
			
			
			
		

	




		

	

	

	
		
	

	
	
		Navigation
	

	
			Main page
	Contents
	Current events
	Random article
	About Wikipedia
	Contact us
	Donate


		
	



	
	
		Contribute
	

	
			Help
	Learn to edit
	Community portal
	Recent changes
	Upload file


		
	



	
		Tools
	

	
			What links here
	Related changes
	Upload file
	Special pages
	Permanent link
	Page information
	Cite this page
	Wikidata item


		
	



	
		Print/export
	

	
			Download as PDF
	Printable version


		
	



	
	
		Languages
	

	
			Alemannisch
	العربية
	Արեւմտահայերէն
	Asturianu
	Azərbaycanca
	Беларуская
	Беларуская (тарашкевіца)
	भोजपुरी
	Български
	Boarisch
	Català
	Чӑвашла
	Čeština
	Cymraeg
	Dansk
	Deutsch
	Eesti
	Ελληνικά
	Español
	Esperanto
	فارسی
	Français
	Frysk
	Galego
	ગુજરાતી
	한국어
	Հայերեն
	हिन्दी
	Bahasa Indonesia
	Interlingue
	Íslenska
	Italiano
	Kabɩyɛ
	ಕನ್ನಡ
	Кыргызча
	ລາວ
	Latviešu
	Lietuvių
	Magyar
	Македонски
	മലയാളം
	Nederlands
	日本語
	Norsk bokmål
	Norsk nynorsk
	Occitan
	Oʻzbekcha/ўзбекча
	ਪੰਜਾਬੀ
	ភាសាខ្មែរ
	Plattdüütsch
	Polski
	Português
	Română
	Русский
	Scots
	Shqip
	Simple English
	Slovenčina
	کوردی
	Српски / srpski
	Srpskohrvatski / српскохрватски
	Suomi
	Svenska
	Tagalog
	தமிழ்
	తెలుగు
	ไทย
	Тоҷикӣ
	Українська
	Tiếng Việt
	Võro
	Winaray
	吴语
	粵語
	中文


		Edit links

	









		 This page was last edited on 13 June 2021, at 12:04 (UTC).
	Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License;
additional terms may apply.  By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.



		Privacy policy
	About Wikipedia
	Disclaimers
	Contact Wikipedia
	Mobile view
	Developers
	Statistics
	Cookie statement