Explanations 
Flashcards 
StudySmarter IA 
Notes 
Study Plans 
Study Sets 
Exams 
Magazine 
Find a job 
Mobile App 
Jump to a key chapter
Legal Positivism Meaning
Legal positivism is a school of thought in jurisprudence and the philosophy of law that seeks to explain law based on the social sources of legal rules. It is a theory that suggests that the validity of law is not related to morality, but rather determined by its creation and structure within society.
Understanding Legal Positivism
Legal positivism posits that law is distinct from morality. This means that a law's validity is inherently connected to its social acceptance and procedural creation rather than its ethical implications. Key elements of legal positivism include:
- Legal Rules: Are created through specific social processes such as legislation and judicial precedents.
- Separation of Law and Morality: Law is valid as long as it follows the created procedures, regardless of its moral aspects.
- Legal Positivism and Authority: The authority of law rests on its source, without the need for moral validation.
Legal Positivism is the theory that laws are rules created by human authorities and holds that law is a matter of social fact, distinct from moral consideration.
Consider a country where the law states that drivers must drive on the right side of the road. From the perspective of legal positivism, this law is valid because it has been legitimately passed by the government. It does not require a moral reason for why driving on the right is better; its validity stems from the recognized authority that enacted it.
Many debates in legal theory center around whether legal systems should be influenced by moral considerations, a point where legal positivism stands in contrast to natural law theories.
Legal Positivism Definition
Legal positivism is a significant theory in the philosophy of law and jurisprudence, emphasizing the idea that laws are rules made by human authorities rather than derived from moral or natural precepts. This theory attributes the creation and enforcement of laws to social institutions and their interplay rather than any ethical or moral considerations.
Understanding Legal Positivism
At the heart of legal positivism is the belief that the validity of a law comes from its source and processes rather than its moral content. This means that:
- Laws are legitimate if they are created through established social procedures.
- There is a clear separation between law and morality, where a law's enforceability is not based on its moral implications.
- Law gains its authority from its makers, such as legislators or authorized bodies, not from moral reasoning.
Imagine a scenario where a law requires wearing seat belts while driving. From a legal positivist perspective, this law is valid because an authoritative government body enacted it, following due legislative process, rather than because wearing a seatbelt is inherently a moral obligation.
The origins of legal positivism can be traced back to the works of legal philosophers such as Jeremy Bentham and John Austin. Bentham critiqued natural law theories for their subjective nature and argued for a legal system based on facts and social practices. John Austin further developed positivism by distinguishing what law 'is' from what law 'ought to be'. These early thinkers emphasized the objective presence of law in society, often arguing that moral considerations should not permeate legal doctrines to avoid subjectivity and inconsistency.
Legal positivism often emphasizes legal clarity and predictability, allowing individuals to navigate the law based on its written form rather than abstract moral principles.
Principles of Legal Positivism
Legal positivism focuses on the determination of law through set principles. These principles serve as foundational beliefs for understanding and implementing law as socially constructed rules rather than moral dictates.
Social Source Thesis
One of the core principles of legal positivism is the Social Source Thesis. This principle asserts that all legal rules are rooted in social norms and institutions, emphasizing the distinct origin of legal rules away from any moral considerations. Legal validity, therefore, is determined by its creation in accordance with socially accepted criteria rather than being inherently linked to moral values.
Social Source Thesis is the principle that posits law as a social construct, which derives its legitimacy and validity from social origins and established procedures, rather than moral arguments.
In many democratic societies, laws are often passed by a parliamentary body. The Social Source Thesis would regard these laws as valid because they follow the socially recognized legislative processes, irrespective of whether the law itself aligns with morality.
Separability Thesis
Another important principle is the Separability Thesis. This principle suggests that law and morality are separate realms, meaning that the validity of a law is independent of its moral content. Laws do not need to fulfill moral standards to be considered legitimate, highlighting the distinction between legally and morally acceptable actions.
The Separability Thesis was famously discussed by philosopher H.L.A. Hart in his works. Hart argued that conflating law with morality leads to confusion, especially in complex legal systems where unjust laws may exist. By maintaining a separation, legal positivism offers clarity in understanding law as a mechanism for societal regulation rather than ethical critique. This distinction also enables discussions around contentious legal issues without predetermined moral biases.
Legal positivism is not inherently opposed to moral criticism of the law; it merely distinguishes between the sources of law and the realms of moral judgement.
Legal Positivism vs Natural Law
The debate between legal positivism and natural law revolves around the origins and validity of legal systems. While legal positivism asserts that laws are the product of human decisions and social conventions, natural law theory posits that law is inherently tied to moral principles and universal ethical standards.
Legal Positivism Explained
Legal positivism is a theory that emphasizes the social construction of law. It holds that the legitimacy of law is determined by the procedures and authority that create it, rather than its moral or ethical content. Central to this theory are:
- Sources of Law: Laws derive from specific social mechanisms such as legislation.
- Separation from Morality: Legal validity is separate from moral judgment.
- Focus on Clarity: It offers a clear framework for legal systems by focusing on law's written form.
The debate between legal positivism and natural law has historical roots with notable figures like Jeremy Bentham, who critiqued natural law for its variability and subjective morality, promoting a more tangible understanding of law through observable and verifiable social practices. Legal positivism has evolved to challenge arguments that suggest law must inherently have moral content, offering perspectives on the function and purpose of legal systems across different societies.
Historical Background of Legal Positivism
Legal positivism has a robust historical foundation, tracing back to influential jurists and philosophers in the 18th and 19th centuries. The development of this theory is marked by key milestones:
- Jeremy Bentham: Introduced the idea that laws are commands devoid of moral reasoning, emphasizing utilitarianism and practical governance.
- John Austin: Further formalized the theory, defining law as commands from a sovereign backed by threats of sanction.
- 20th Century Developments: Scholars like H.L.A. Hart modernized legal positivism, emphasizing the rule of recognition and criticizing the oversimplification of Austin's command theory.
A historical example: Consider the evolution of legal systems during the Enlightenment. Governments sought codification of laws grounded in practical governance rather than theological doctrines, aligning with the rise of legal positivism.
Key Figures in Legal Positivism
Several philosophers and jurists have been pivotal in shaping legal positivism. These include:
- Jeremy Bentham: Advocated for a systematic approach to law based on utility, distancing law from natural mandates.
- John Austin: Developed the 'command theory,' viewing laws as sovereign mandates.
- H.L.A. Hart: Introduced the 'rule of recognition,' refining the theory and addressing criticisms of earlier models.
- Joseph Raz: Contributed to the idea of law as a reason for action, emphasizing the authority aspect of legal systems.
Command Theory: A concept developed by John Austin, describing law as commands issued by the sovereign, enforced by threats of sanctions.
Consider H.L.A. Hart's refinement of legal positivism, notably through his critique of John Austin's command theory. Hart emphasized the diversity of laws, introducing the idea that laws can include rules of recognition, change, and adjudication, creating a more comprehensive understanding of legal systems.
Criticisms of Legal Positivism
Despite its influence, legal positivism faces several critiques, often from natural law theorists and ethical philosophers. The criticisms revolve around:
- Morality and Law: Critics argue that law can’t be entirely divorced from morality as it guides human behavior.
- Rigid Formalism: The focus on procedure over substance may lead to unjust laws being treated as valid.
- Lack of Moral Guidance: Without moral underpinnings, critics contend that law lacks direction and can be manipulative.
Critics of legal positivism often point to historical instances such as discriminatory laws that, though legally valid, are morally contentious, exemplifying the theory’s limitations.
legal positivism - Key takeaways
- Legal Positivism Definition: A jurisprudence theory that sees laws as socially constructed rules not necessarily linked to morality.
- Separation from Morality: Asserts that law’s validity is based on its social acceptance and creation procedures, independent of ethical considerations.
- Social Source Thesis: The idea that all legal rules are rooted in social norms and institutions, emphasizing law as a social construct.
- Separability Thesis: Suggests that law and morality are distinct, meaning legal validity does not depend on moral content.
- Legal Positivism vs Natural Law: Legal positivism focuses on the source and creation of laws, while natural law ties law to moral principles.
- Key Figures: Influential figures include Jeremy Bentham, John Austin, H.L.A. Hart, and Joseph Raz, each contributing unique perspectives to the theory.
Learn with 12 legal positivism flashcards in the free StudySmarter app
We have 14,000 flashcards about Dynamic Landscapes.
Already have an account? Log in
Frequently Asked Questions about legal positivism
Test your knowledge with multiple choice flashcards
YOUR SCORE
Your score
Join the StudySmarter App and learn efficiently with millions of flashcards and more!
Learn with 12 legal positivism flashcards in the free StudySmarter app
Already have an account? Log in
About StudySmarter
StudySmarter is a globally recognized educational technology company, offering a holistic learning platform designed for students of all ages and educational levels. Our platform provides learning support for a wide range of subjects, including STEM, Social Sciences, and Languages and also helps students to successfully master various tests and exams worldwide, such as GCSE, A Level, SAT, ACT, Abitur, and more. We offer an extensive library of learning materials, including interactive flashcards, comprehensive textbook solutions, and detailed explanations. The cutting-edge technology and tools we provide help students create their own learning materials. StudySmarter’s content is not only expert-verified but also regularly updated to ensure accuracy and relevance.
Learn more