Jurisprudence

Jurisprudence, also known as theory of law or philosophy of law, is the examination in a general perspective of what law is and what it ought to be. It investigates issues such as the definition of law; legal validity; legal norms and values; and the relationship between law and other fields of study, including <a href="/facts/Law_and_economics/za7teyY2">economics</a>, <a href="/facts/Applied_ethics/2hJ71mWo">ethics</a>, <a href="/facts/Legal_history/D88LhVl2">history</a>, <a href="/facts/Sociology_of_law/CSud4S9v">sociology</a>, and <a href="/facts/Political_philosophy/JuLBNdAX">political philosophy</a>.
Modern jurisprudence began in the 18th century and was based on the first principles of <a href="/facts/Natural_law/LoBqj5pT">natural law</a>, <a href="/facts/Civil_law_(legal_system)/R878oQ6V">civil law</a>, and the <a href="/facts/Law_of_nations/WJEPeq44">law of nations</a>. Contemporary philosophy of law 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. 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:

<ul><li>Natural law holds that there are rational objective limits to the power of rulers, the foundations of law are accessible through reason, and it is from these laws of nature that human laws gain force.</li>
<li><a href="/facts/Analytical_jurisprudence/7dTQ4HQS">Analytic jurisprudence</a> attempts to describe what law is. The two historically dominant theories in analytic jurisprudence are <a href="/facts/Legal_positivism/zmn1cjg1">legal positivism</a> and <a href="/facts/Natural_law/LoBqj5pT">natural law theory</a>. According to <a href="/facts/Legal_positivism/zmn1cjg1">Legal Positivists</a>, what law is and what law ought to be have no necessary connection to one another, so it is theoretically possible to engage in analytic jurisprudence without simultaneously engaging in normative jurisprudence. According to <a href="/facts/Natural_law/LoBqj5pT">Natural Law Theorists</a>, there is a necessary connection between what law is and what it ought to be, so it is impossible to engage in analytic jurisprudence without simultaniously engaging in normative jurisprudence.</li>
<li><a href="/facts/Normative_jurisprudence/wNTsXP4F">Normative jurisprudence</a> attempts to prescribe what law ought to be. It is concerned with the goal or purpose of law and what moral or political theories provide a foundation for the law. It attempts to determine what the proper function of law should be, what sorts of acts should be subject to legal sanctions, and what sorts of punishment should be permitted.</li>
<li>Sociological jurisprudence studies the nature and functions of law in the light of social scientific knowledge. It emphasises variation of legal phenomena between different cultures and societies. It relies especially on empirically-oriented social theory, but draws theoretical resources from diverse disciplines.</li>
<li><a href="/facts/Experimental_jurisprudence/3yW6N1Ap">Experimental jurisprudence</a> seeks to investigate the content of legal concepts using the methods of social science, unlike the philosophical methods of traditional jurisprudence.</li></ul>
The terms "philosophy of law" and "jurisprudence" are often used interchangeably, though jurisprudence sometimes encompasses forms of reasoning that fit into <a href="/facts/Law_and_economics/za7teyY2">economics</a> or <a href="/facts/Sociology_of_law/CSud4S9v">sociology</a>.

Jurisprudence open-in-new

Jurisprudence