Formalists also rely on inductive reasoning to settle legal disputes. While deductive reasoning involves the application of general principles which, when applied to the facts, result in a specific rule, inductive reasoning begins with a set of specific rules and follows a broader legal principle that can be applied to comparable disputes in the future. Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479, 85 pp. Ct. 1678, 14 L. Ed. 2d 510 (1965), is an example. In Griswold, the Supreme Court held that although there is no express provision in the federal Constitution that guarantees the right to privacy and no precedent has established such a right, an individual`s right to privacy can be inferred from the First, Third, Fourth, Fifth, Ninth and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution and cases interpreting them.

Benjamin N. Cardozo, considered by some to be a follower of sociological jurisprudence and by others to be a realist, was another Supreme Court justice who incorporated history into his philosophy of law. In assessing the merits of a lawsuit brought under the due process provisions of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments, Cardozo has refused to exonerate claims that are not « implicit in the concept of ordered liberty » and the « principles of justice so deeply rooted in the traditions and conscience of our people that they are considered fundamental » (Palko v. Connecticut, 302 U.S. 319, 58 p. ct. 149, 82 L. ed. 288 [1937]). There are many other normative approaches to legal philosophy, including critical legal studies and libertarian legal theories. John Rawls was an American philosopher; 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 considered one of the most important English-speaking political philosophers of the 20th century.

His theory of justice uses a method called the « primordial position » to ask us what principles of justice we would choose to regulate the fundamental institutions of our society if we were behind a « veil of ignorance. » Imagine if we didn`t know who we are – our race, gender, wealth, status, class, or any other differentiating factor – for fear of being biased in our favor. Rawls argued from this « original position » that we would choose exactly the same political freedoms for all, such as freedom of speech, the right to vote, etc. In addition, we would choose a system in which there are only inequalities, as this creates incentives for the economic well-being of society as a whole, especially the poorest. This is Rawls` famous « principle of difference ». Justice is fairness in the sense that the fairness of the initial position of choice guarantees the fairness of the principles chosen in that position. Analytical or « clarifying » jurisprudence means adopting a neutral point of view and using descriptive language when dealing with different aspects of legal systems. It was a philosophical development that rejected the fusion of what law is and what it should be by natural law. [4] David Hume argued in A Treatise of Human Nature[29] that people inevitably move from describing what the world is to asserting that we should therefore follow a certain course of action.

But out of pure logic, we can`t conclude that we should do something just because something is. The analysis and clarification of how the world is must therefore be treated as a strictly normative and evaluative question about what to do. Aristotle`s theory of justice is linked to his idea of the middle ground. In fact, his treatment of what he calls « political justice » stems from his discussion of « the righteous » as a moral virtue, derived as a means between opposing vices, just like any other virtue he describes. [15] His longest discussion of his theory of justice is found in Nicomachean Ethics and begins with the question of what a right act means. He argues that the term « justice » actually refers to two different but related ideas: general justice and special justice. [16] [17] If a person`s actions toward others are completely virtuous in every way, Aristotle calls them « righteous » in the sense of « general justice »; As such, this idea of justice is more or less co-extensive with virtue. [18] « Particular » or « partial » justice, on the other hand, is the part of « general justice » or individual virtue that deals with the fair treatment of others.

[17] The course is divided into three sections: The first part of the course deals with the question: Who is a curator? The second: Who is a right-wing conservative? And third, what is a conservative method of interpreting the law? Joseph Raz`s theory of legal positivism opposes the inclusion of moral values to explain the validity of law. In his 1979 book, The Authority of Law, Raz criticized what he called the « weak social thesis » used to explain the law. [42] He frames the weak social thesis as follows: « (a) Sometimes the identification of certain laws revolves around moral arguments, but also with (b) In all legal systems, the identification of a law revolves around moral arguments. » [43] Raz argues that the authority of the law is identifiable only by social sources, without reference to moral arguments. [43] He calls this view « the source thesis. » [44] Raz suggests that any categorization of rules beyond their authoritative role is better left to sociology than to jurisprudence. [45] Some philosophers used to claim that positivism is the theory that holds that there is « no necessary connection » between law and morality; but influential contemporary positivists – including Joseph Raz, John Gardner and Leslie Green – reject this view. As Raz points out, it is necessary that there be defects that a legal system cannot have (for example, it cannot commit rape or murder). Jurisprudence is a collective term for the whole legal subject, the study of law and legal issues. It is derived from the Latin term juris prudentia, which means « the study, knowledge or science of law ». It refers to the legal philosophy used in the analysis, explanation and classification of law. There are different types of philosophies under the concept of jurisprudence.

These include formalism, realism, naturalism, critical jurisprudence, feminist jurisprudence, law and economics, utilitarianism, and legal pragmatism. The word jurisprudence is derived from the Latin term juris prudentia, which means « the study, knowledge or science of law ». In the United States, jurisprudence generally means the philosophy of law. The philosophy of law has many aspects, but four of them are the most common: Hans Kelsen is considered one of the most prominent jurists of the 20th century and was very influential in Europe and Latin America, although less so in common law countries. His pure legal theory describes law as « binding norms, » but at the same time refuses to evaluate those norms. This means that « jurisprudence » must be separated from « legal policy ». At the heart of pure legal theory is the concept of the « fundamental norm » – a hypothetical norm assumed by the jurist, from which all the « inferior » norms of the hierarchy of a legal system, beginning with constitutional law, are understood in order to derive their authority or degree from their binding character. Kelsen argues that the extent to which legal norms are binding, their specifically « juridical » character, can be understood without ultimately attributing it to a superhuman source such as God, nature personified or, very importantly in his time, a personified state or nation. Students who successfully complete this course will be able to (1) identify the conceptual framework of African studies, (2) decenter the West in its reflection on « law » and indigenous forms of governance, (3) identify methods of research and identification of Africana`s « legal » frameworks, (4) through classroom reading and discussion, research avenues around the relationship between the Africana « legal » framework and other governance frameworks. Analyze governance, and (5) discuss and consider how U.S.

jurisprudence and laws interfere (d) and interact with Africana governance protocols. Evaluation of the primary course is done using a traditional two-draft session document. Four law schools have attempted to answer these questions: formalism suggests that law is a science; Realism says that law is just another name for politics; Positivism suggests that the law should be limited to written rules and regulations issued or recognized by the government; And naturalism claims that law must reflect the eternal principles of justice and morality that exist independently of state recognition. Jurisprudence or legal theory is the theoretical study of the relevance of law. Jurists seek to explain the essence of law in its most general form, providing a deeper understanding of legal reasoning and analogy, legal systems, legal institutions, and the proper application and role of law in society. [1] Not every law school is an autonomous body of thought. The boundaries separating positivism from realism and natural law from formalism are often blurred. Justice Holmes` legal philosophy, for example, was based on realist, positivist, pragmatic and historical schools of thought. Some of the earliest mentions of the concept of jurisprudence are found in ancient Indian texts known as Dharmashastra texts. At that time, there was great belief in the concept of Dharmas and morality. The study of law also helps to simplify certain concepts and complexities of the legal world. This makes them more manageable and rational and therefore easier to understand.