Introduction to Jurisprudence

Introduction
Jurisprudence helps a person to understand the deeper meaning of the law. Jurisprudence is
an integral part of the law which is based on theories and various analysis. Jurisprudence
talks about the relationship of law with other social sciences, society, man and nature.

Meaning
Jurisprudence means the study of law in a logical and philosophical manner. The word
Jurisprudence has been originated from the Latin word Juris prudentia which can be broken
down into two parts, and that is juris which originated from the word jus which means law
and the word prudential which means prudence, forethought or discretion.

Jurisprudence can also be referred to as a legal theory. Jurisprudence gives us an overview

and a much more in-depth understanding of the law and the role of law in society.
Jurisprudence deals with legal reasoning, legal institutions and legal systems.

Importance of the study of

Jurisprudence
One of the major importance of the study of Jurisprudence is its fundamental value.
Jurisprudence mainly comprises of research and the method to construct and clarify the basic
concepts of law. Jurisprudence is not concerned with the making of the new laws; rather, it
focuses on existing laws in the system and Jurisprudence, and its theories can help lawyers to
form a better and much more improved practice.

Jurisprudence can also help students. It has its own scholastic worth in the life of students.
Jurisprudence not only focuses on primary legal rules, but it also talks about the social impact
of those laws. Jurisprudence combines logical and theoretical analysis of legal concepts. So it
proliferates the analytical methods and techniques of a student.

Jurisprudence also focuses on law and its social value. It talks about fairness and the
articulation of law. Jurisprudence deals with the basic fundamentals of the law and it is the
eye of law. It helps a person to understand the thoughts and divisions of law.

Jurisprudence is also the grammar of law. It helps a person to understand the language and
the grammar of law. Legal language and grammar are very different when compared to
ordinary language, so Jurisprudence trains the mind of a lawyer so that he can use proper
legal vocabularies and expressions.

Jurisprudence provides the rules of interpretation and as a result, it helps judges and lawyers
in understanding the importance of laws passed by the legislators.

Jurisprudence and its relationship with other social sciences provide a broad spectrum to
students in understanding how law can be related and connected with other disciplines.
Jurisprudence teaches people that an answer to a legal problem is not hidden in the past or
awaiting in the future rather than the answer to a legal problem is hidden around them in the
fundamentals of legal studies.

Jurisprudence also talks about political rights and legal rights and how the system can strive
to balance them out. A student can also look into it with the help of Jurisprudence.

Jurisprudence and its relationship

with other sciences
1. Sociology and Jurisprudence
The sociological approach to Jurisprudence is easily the most important relation between
Jurisprudence and other sciences. The reason why it is so important is that the sociological
approach is much more concerned in the working of law rather than its fundamentals and
basics.

Sociological jurists want to know the effect of law in our society and how law and society
work together. Sociological Jurisprudence sees the law as an institution.

Sociological Jurisprudence thinks that laws can be made, transformed and changed according
to the needs of society. Basically, it means the law can be adjusted as per societal needs.

2. Economics and Jurisprudence

Economic studies focus on wealth and its distribution in society with the aim to regulate the
lives of people of a State. Similarly, the law also focuses on regulating the lives of the people
through rules and regulations. Initially, the relationship between Jurisprudence and
Economics was ignored for a long time until jurists realised the importance of economics in
law.

Normative Jurisprudence talks about the stable economic allocation of resources in a society
and how it shall reflect consumer preference.

3. History and Jurisprudence

Historical Jurisprudence mainly forms a significant part of legal history as a subject. Law has
been around for centuries, and as we know Jurisprudence is the study of law so if we don’t
trace back the origin and development of laws, then we are missing out on a theoretical
aspect of Jurisprudence.

Development of law through the years gives us an insight, and it helps us to research more
about it. Historical Jurisprudence sheds light on the influences that led to the development of
a particular law.
4. Ethics and Jurisprudence
Ethics talks about the fact that how the law should be in an ideal state. Ethical Jurisprudence
is focused on the fact of how law can be used as an instrument to affirm positive ethics.

Ethics and Jurisprudence state that laws should be based on ethical principles and it should
not be treated otherwise. Ethics helps to criticise laws which are unethical in nature.

5. Politics and Jurisprudence

Political Jurisprudence states that the laws made for people shall be unbiased. There should
be no hidden political agendas in law. If a law is politically motivated, then it is clear that
such laws shall have no place in our society.

Laws must be influenced by the political environment of a country and that is why countries
develop their own constitution which showcases the current social and political needs of a
country.

Theories of law in Jurisprudence

Natural Law
Natural law is a part of Jurisprudence, and frankly, there is not a definite way to define
natural law. Natural law can still somehow be stated as laws which originated from sources
which are other-worldly or some God-like source, basically, the point is natural law did not
originate from some political authority or any legislature.

In Jurisprudence, it is believed that Natural law can be applied anywhere in the world i.e.
Natural law has universal applicability. Whenever we talk about the term true law it can be
said that laws which are obligatory in nature are said to be true law so by that analysis we
can say that natural law is not true law.

The reason natural law is not true law because natural law is not obligatory in its true sense.
Natural law acts as a defence for moral relativism. Moral judgement varies from places to
religion to culture and this theory was ascended by Greek philosophers. The philosophers
drew a distinction between the law of nature and conventional human choices and this
distinction acted against natural law.

Natural law hence aims to find a common moral ground for different cultures and different
religions. But still, the idea of natural law raises a lot of questions and the biggest and
relevant one is whether moral proposition can be derived from the proposal of facts.

A prime example of this question would be people might agree or disagree whether
euthanasia is justifiable but then again people would not argue over the justification of
punishment over a crime. So it is impossible to affirm the premise and deny the conclusion.
Basically, there are still millions of pseudo-theories related to natural law and most of them
are not realistic.

So coming to realism and a realistic standpoint at certain cases natural law creates conflict
between law and morals. Certain existing laws are inhumane if we consider the theory of
natural law. So a law must be analysed on the basis of its efficiency, simplicity and if the law
serves a right combination of justice and morality.

Imperative law
Imperative law directly opposes natural law. Imperative law is much more focused on realism
when it is compared to natural law. Here in this article, we will discuss Austin’s view on
imperative law.

So imperative law is laid down by the sovereign of a country and it is enforced by sanctions,
and imperative law is a type of command.

There is a distinct difference between command and law and for a command to qualify as
laws that command must be given by a political superior or sovereign. Since this theory
defines law in terms of command, sovereign and sanction we can conclude that Imperative
theory cannot provide adequate analysis for standard law.

Legal realism
There is a certain similarity between the theories of legal realism and imperative law and that
similarity is both the theories sees the law as a type of command.

But in the case of the theory of legal realism, it sees the law as a type of command that must
be given by the legislature and for legal realism, the sovereign is the Supreme Court. This
approach is used in the United States with Holmes influencing it further. Holmes further
states that law, in reality, is judge-made and not made by some supreme power and the
actions of courts are not necessarily deduced by statutes and books.

Law of obligation
Law of obligation has been derived from Roman law in its legal sense. Law of obligation can
be said to be a relationship of legal necessity in its original sense. All the law of obligation
relates to being proprietary rights in its own sense.

In Jurisprudence, a person who gains benefit from the law of obligation is termed as a
creditor and the person who is bound by the law of obligation is termed as a debtor.

Schools of thought in Jurisprudence

Philosophical School
The Philosophical School focuses much more in the theory of natural law. This school seeks to
find out the reason why a law is enacted and what are the effects of such a law in our
society. They believe the purpose of the law is to enhance the nobility of humanity. The
philosophical school is not concerned with the analytical and the historical aspect of law.
Analytical School
Analytical School is much more focused on the theory of imperative law. analytical school is
related to the origin of civil law. Analytical school talks about the concept of rights and duties
and investigates legal models such as acts and contracts.

Analytical school of law believes that law should be codified and the law must be governed by
the state with the aim of the benefit of people.

Historical School
The historical school believes that law is a consequence of years of growth of our society. The
historical school believes that the sources of law are customs, religious philosophies and
societal rules.

Historical school is too much dependent in the past and as a result, it becomes much more
conservative but still after such conservatism, the historical school states that law must
change with the people.

Realist School
Realist school is technically not a school of jurisprudence; rather realist school is tutoring of
thoughts. In realist school, they are much more focused on the actions of the court and what
they create. Realist school merely does logical assumptions from the general law.

Sociological School
Sociological school concentrated more on the function of law rather than its intangible
content. The sociological school came into existence due to the accumulation of various
thoughts of jurists. The sociological school wanted to connect law with society and law can be
adjusted according to the needs of the society. Sociological school talks about legal
institutions, doctrines and other theoretical aspects of the law.

To know more about schools of Jurisprudence in detail please Click Here.

Famous jurists in Jurisprudence

Aristotle is also known as the father of natural law. He talked about the importance of
natural law in the society and as we know he was correct since even in modern times a lot of
tribunals across the world function on the basis of natural law and natural justice.

Thomas Aquinas distinguished four kinds of law and they were eternal law, natural law,
human law and divine law. So for him, eternal law was made by God himself and natural law
is discovered by motivation from the eternal law. Divine law are the laws which are God’s
scriptures and human law is made by man.

John Austin opposed the theory of natural law. He wanted to convert law into science and
he was positivist. The reason why he was a positivist is that he believed all the laws that are
existent today can be drawn back to mortal lawmakers.
The five schools of thought in general jurisprudence
Philosophical school of thought
Philosophical jurisprudence is rooted in natural law – the belief that law is a logical extension of
humanity’s inherent morals and common societal rules.
Key contributors to this school of thought include:
 Aristotle, the Greek philosopher who is widely considered to be the father of natural law.
While Aristotle spoke more on morality, rather than the law as we know it, his arguments about
political justice and political philosophy – that justice is derived from both nature and convention
– have helped shape the arguments of modern natural law theorists.
 Thomas Equinas, the theologian who argued that there were four kinds of law: eternal law –
divine reason known only to God – natural law, divine law as shared through scripture, and human
law.
 John Finnis, a modern natural law theorist who maintains that law is moral by nature.
Analytical school of thought
The analytical school of thought borrows from analytical philosophy to better understand the nature of
law. It asks questions such as ‘What are laws?’, ‘What is the relationship between law and power?’,
and “What is the relationship between law and morality?’.
Key contributors to this school of thought include:
 Jeremy Bentham, a philosopher and jurist who opposed the idea of natural law and
championed social reforms such as individual freedom, equal rights for women, the
decriminalisation of homosexuality, and the abolition of slavery.
 H.L.A. Hart, a legal philosopher who published the influential The Concept of Law in 1961.
Hart said that a legal system’s validity comes from what he called the “rule of recognition” – the
combination of primary and secondary rules and sources of law that create the legal system.
 Hans Kelsen, an Austrian jurist who published Pure Theory of Law in 1934 before authoring
a significantly expanded second edition in 1960.
It’s worth noting that Hart and Kelsen’s books are still commonly cited in jurisprudential research,
and both men are considered among the foremost legal philosophers of the twentieth century.
Historical school of thought
Historical jurisprudence rejects the idea of natural law, and asserts that law is found, rather than made,
within a community of people.
The key contributor to this school of thought was Friedrich Carl von Savigny, who believed that the
purpose of jurisprudence was to examine existing bodies of law for insight into their historical origins
and subsequent transformations.
Realist school of thought
The realist school of thought suggests that jurisprudencial research should mirror natural scientific
methods rather than philosophical ones.
Key contributors to this school of thought include:
 Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr., an American jurist and Supreme Court Justice who argued that
judges and legal professionals draw from realist influences, such as public policy, as well as
personal prejudice and experience, when practising law or deciding cases.
 Karl Llewellyn, an American jurisprudential scholar, who argued that the law is composed of
the facts and outcomes of cases, rather than legal rules and legal doctrines.
Sociological school of thought

Sociological jurisprudence developed in the twentieth century alongside

sociology and other social sciences. Today, it helps shed light on the
relationship between law and culture.

The key contributor to this school of thought is Roscoe Pound, formerly the Dean of Harvard’s school
of law, who helped emphasise the importance of social relationships in the development of law, as
well as the importance of law within social relationships.
Common legal theories
1. Natural law. Natural law theory suggests that the law should be based on humanity’s
intrinsic ethics and morals. It is the key theory within jurisprudence’s philosophical school of
thought, and is associated with the maxim ‘An unjust law is no law at all’.
2. Legal positivism. Legal positivism is the dominant theory within the analytical school of
thought. Positive law is effectively the antithesis to natural law, proposing that the law isn’t
actually connected to any kind of inherent morality, but rather is the product of a human body
such as the government. Prominent positivist proponents include Bentham, and jurists John
Austin and Joseph Raz. Its detractors include Ronald Dworkin, an American philosopher whose
critiques of the theory argue that the law cannot be separated from morality.
3. Legal realism. Legal realism is the foundation for the realist school of thought, and also has
ties for the sociological school of thought. It contends that the law should be descriptive, and
should account for the reasons – besides legal rules – that lead to any particular legal ruling or
decision.
4. Critical legal studies. Critical legal studies is a relatively new theory that has developed over
the past few decades. With ties to legal realism, it suggests that the law is contradictory, and is
effectively an expression of a dominant social group’s policy goals.