Analytical jurisprudence
This article needs additional citations for verification. (March 2017) |
Analytical jurisprudence is a philosophical approach to law that draws on the resources of modern
Analytical jurisprudence is not to be mistaken for legal formalism (the idea that legal reasoning is or can be modelled as a mechanical, algorithmic process). Indeed, it was the analytical jurists who first pointed out that legal formalism is fundamentally mistaken as a theory of law.
Analytic, or 'clarificatory' jurisprudence uses a neutral point of view and descriptive language when referring to the 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. David Hume famously argued in A Treatise of Human Nature that people invariably slip between describing that the world is a certain way to saying therefore we ought to conclude on 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 to normative and evaluative ought questions.
The most important questions of analytic jurisprudence are: "
See also
References
- ^ Bodenheimer, Edgar, Modern Analytical Jurisprudence and the Limits of Its Usefulness, University of Pennsylvania Law Review
- JSTOR 1334739.
- JSTOR 42891598.