Biological Positivism Essay

b) Critically evaluate the views of Austin and Hart as to why people abide by the law. It is fair to say that people generally follow the rules of the law. However, it is often questioned why people abide by the law? This question is one which has proved to be highly controversial. Many individuals have attempted to answer this difficult question. John Austin and H.L.A. Hart are two very renowned positivists who attempted to address this issue. Austin strongly believed that people follow laws…

Austin’s Pure Theory of Law, has attracted attention among many legal theorists. This essay will begin by discussing John Austin’s Legal positivism. It will then discuss Kelsen’s Pure Theory of Law. This essay will also distinguish between John Austin’s theory and Han Kelsen’s pure theory. Legal Positivism With a long history and broad influence, legal positivism, is discussed in mediaeval legal and political thought. Its roots lie in the conventionalist political philosophies of Hobbes,…

Summary: The Law is a well written piece by Frederic Bastiat on the defense of liberty, natural human rights, rule of law, and the importance of true justice. The context of the reading begins with a definition and a purpose of law. Law can be defined as the enforcement of rightful defense via a collective force. Bastiat stated that all purposes of law should be used to protect life, liberty, property and punish plunder. Plunder is defined by Bastiat as taking belongings from one inhabitant…

Proposition: Hart argues that we conceptualized the Grudge informer case by maintaining unjust law is still a law, but perhaps so unjust that it should be disobeyed: On the one hand, we will begin our analysis by explaining the first part of the proposition “Hart argues that we conceptualized the Grudge informer case by maintaining unjust law is still a law”. In order to understand why according to him an unjust law is still a law, it is necessary to remind briefly his view on the connection…

Hourani provides an alternative interpretation to Thrasymachus’s position on justice that is best characterized as deontological. Similarly to Kerferd and Nicholson, Hourani takes the position that Thrasymachus’s opening statement is designed to make an “impression of daring cynicism”; however, that justice is the advantage of the stronger is not meant to be taken as a literal definition of justice. Instead, Hourani advocates that Thrasymachus is talking about obedience to the law when…

The rules or standards, associated with positivism require that the judge follows predetermined principles and routes when interpreting the law and evidence. The two main principles that must be used when assessing legalities are whether or not it is a) not part of a valid law or b) apart of a valid…

differences between natural law and legal positivism. However, before diving into the differences, a definition for both the theories should be provided. Basically, a natural law is a law in which is derived from the validity of morality and reasoning. Natural law is believed to be served on the best interest of the common good as well. For legal positivism, it is viewed in the source of a law has no connection between reasoning and morality. A legal positivism should be from an establishment of…

When commentators discuss the United States Supreme Court’s jurisprudence, there is often spirited debate concerning which decisions constitute the ‘best’ and ‘worst’ in the Court’s history. Far too often, this debate splits along ideological lines, with progressive commentators praising landmark decisions such as Roe v. Wade and Obergefell v. Hodges, and conservative commentators lamenting decisions such as Planned Parenthood v. Casey and Lawrence v. Texas. Regardless of one’s ideological…

Natural Law Theory and Neo-Natural Law Theory Natural Law Theory starts in the belief that there is an order to the universe. This ordering of the universe leads to laws that are natural; things have a purpose. The principles of law are an inherent part of nature. Even without the human capacity for reason, the principles of law would exist (Perlman). From a moral perspective, natural law is an affirmational objectivism, meaning that there can be a reasonable validity to a moral position.…

The play antigone evidently demonstrates the contention of common law and divine law.Here divine law is spoken to by antigone while mainstream law is spoken to by ruler Creon. Aside from this there are different characters in the play who maintains Antigone in the play the contention is not of identities but rather of ideas– the contention of standards. The ruler bolsters mainstream law while others underpins the religious soul that is divine law. In any case is the standard of the god in…