Uncategorized

Schools of Thought Law

November 29, 2022

Despite its declining popularity, legal realism continues to influence a wide range of schools of jurisprudence today, including critical legal studies, feminist legal theory, critical racial theory, sociology of law, law, and economics. [53] From a historical perspective, law is considered to be the sum of the rules that govern social customs and human experience over time. Amendments to the law on the evolution of company rules and customs. Someone who joins the historical school is more likely than those from other schools to follow precedents to solve contemporary problems. There are two different schools of legal realism: American legal realism and Scandinavian legal realism. American legal realism emerged from the writings of Oliver Wendell Holmes. At the beginning of Holmes` The Common Law, he asserts that “the life of law was not logical: it was experience.” [47] This view was a reaction to the legal formalism popular at the time due to Christopher Columbus Langdell. [48] Holmes` writings on jurisprudence also laid the foundation for predictive legal theory. In his article “The Path of the Law,” Holmes argues that “the object of [legal] studies .

is the prediction, the prediction of the appearance of public authority through the instrumentality of the courts. [49] Abstract This article focuses on X-rays from the perspective of philosophy/school of realist thought in law, as it refers to its superiority over other schools of thought in the field of jurisprudence and the Nigerian legal system. projectgist.com.ng/2017/06/16/analysis-various-schools-thought-relationmeaning-law/ en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Realism_ (Art) Realist philosophy and how it is superior in practice to other schools of thought. The realist school is of American origin; However, his philosophy has been widely accepted in many legal systems around the world. This school had prominent advocates such as Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jerome Frank, Karl Llewellyn and so on. They firmly believe that the law is nothing more than the result of what happens in the courts. They vehemently distanced themselves from the idea that the law was a set of formal rules that were clearly formulated and had to be followed. The school of thought of natural law emphasizes that law must be based on a universal moral order. Natural law was “discovered” by man through the use of reason and by choosing between good and evil. Here is the definition of natural law according to the Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy: “Natural law, also called natural law in moral and political philosophy, is an objective norm or set of objective norms governing human behavior, similar to the positive laws of a human ruler, but equally binding on all human beings and generally understood to involve a superhuman legislator.” Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy, s.v.

“Natural Law”. In addition to the question “What is law?”, the philosophy of law also deals with normative or “evaluative” legal theories. What is the purpose or purpose of the law? What moral or political theories form the basis of law? What is the real function of law? What types of acts should be punished and what types of punishment should be allowed? What is justice? What are our rights? Is there a duty to obey the law? What is the value of the rule of law? Some of the different schools and leading thinkers are discussed below. We could look at existing laws, guidelines, which take the form of general rules to be followed in the nation-state or its subdivisions. Laws control judicial decisions or the common law, but are subject to (and are controlled by) constitutional law – decrees, regulations or court decisions – in a manner precise enough to know what the law says. For example, we could look at the published speed limits on most U.S. highways and conclude that the “right” or “right” speed does not exceed fifty-five miles per hour. Or we could look a little deeper and find out how the written law is usually enforced. In this way, we could conclude that sixty-one miles per hour are generally authorized by most state troops, but that sometimes someone receives a ticket for fifty-seven miles per hour within a fifty-five miles per hour zone.

Both approaches are empirical, but not strictly scientific. The first approach, which examines exactly what the rule itself says, is sometimes called the “positivist” school of legal thought. The second approach, based on the social context and actual behaviour of key law enforcement actors, is similar to the “legal realist” school of thought (see Section 1.2.3 “Other Schools of Legal Thought”). Casmir Ugwu is a 300-level law student at the University of Nigeria, Enugu campus, who wants to build a niche/fortress in legal writing. This article was born out of my unconventional thoughts and strong belief in realistic jurisprudence and law in its entirety. The article is intended to help legal scholars get a sense of the many points of criticism of different schools of thought. It`s not one, but I`m also a freelancer. The Natural School: This school of thought has many followers, from Thomas Aquinas, Socrates, Aristotle, Cicero, John Finn, St. Augustine and so on, who believe that there is a universal law of a supernatural being discovered by reason or rationalization.

He also derives his claim from the idea that nature is perfect and that people behave in their distinction between good and evil and should be guided by it. According to Thomas Aquinas (1224-1274 BC), the law is a decree of reason for the common good, made by the one (God) who cares for the community. He went on to explain that “the light of reason is placed in each person by nature, and therefore by God, to guide him in his actions.” A second important debate, often referred to as the “Hart-Dworkin debate”,[14] concerns the struggle between the two most dominant schools of the late 20th and early 21st centuries, legal interpretivism and legal positivism. The purpose of this article is to examine the different schools of thought with particular attention to realism and its superiority over other schools. Under the Roman Empire, law schools were established and the practice of law became more academic. From the beginning of the Roman Empire to the 3rd century, relevant literature was produced by groups of scholars, including the Proculians and Sabinians. The scientific character of the studies was unprecedented in antiquity. The best proof that Aristotle thought there was a law of nature comes from rhetoric, where Aristotle states that in addition to the “special” laws that each people has established, there is a “common” law that corresponds to nature. [20] However, the context of this remark only suggests that Aristotle believed that it might be rhetorically advantageous to invoke such a law, especially if the “special” law of his own city opposed the case, not that such a law actually existed. [21] Aristotle also considered that some candidates for universal natural law were false. [22] Aristotle`s theoretical authorship of the natural law tradition is therefore controversial. [23] The development of American law can be explained by experience, but also by reference to several philosophical or scientific theories.

The study and theory of law is known as jurisprudence. Below are several schools of legal thought that shape our understanding of the law. However, this school of thought is criticized on the grounds that most of its rules or assumptions have no empirical way of measuring them.