Hart and Lon L.
Background[ edit ] The Concept of Law emerged from a set of lectures Hart delivered in The book developed a sophisticated view of legal positivism. Among the ideas developed in the book are: A critique of John Austin's theory that law is the command of the sovereign backed by sanction.
A distinction between primary and secondary legal rules, where a primary rule governs conduct and a secondary rule allows the creation, alteration, or extinction of primary rules. A distinction between the internal and external points of view of law and rules, close to and influenced by Max Weber 's distinction between the sociological and the legal perspectives of law.
The idea of the rule of recognitiona social rule that differentiated between those norms that have the authority of law and those that do not. Hart viewed the rule of recognition as an evolution from Hans Kelsen 's " Grundnorm ", or "basic norm".
Austin's "command theory"[ edit ] The starting point for the discussion is Hart's dissatisfaction with John Austin 's "command theory": Hart likens Austin's theory to the role of a gunman in a bank and tries to establish the differences between the gunman's orders and those made by law. For instance, the gunman forces us to obey but we may not feel inclined to obey him.
Presumably, obedience to the law comes with a different feeling. Hart identifies three such important differences: In terms of content, not all laws are imperative or coercive.
Some are facilitative, allowing us to create contracts and other legal relations. Austin believed that every legal system had to have a sovereign who creates the law origin while remaining unaffected by it rangesuch as the bank scene's gunman, who is the only source of commands and who is not subject to other's commands.
Hart argues that this is an inaccurate description of law, noting that laws may have several sources and legislators are very often subject to the laws they create.
Hart lets us know that laws are much broader in scope than coercive orders, contrary to the "command theory" of Austin. Frequently laws are enabling and so allow citizens to carry out authoritative acts such as the making of wills or contracts which have legal effect.
Social habits and rules[ edit ] Hart draws a distinction between a social habit which people follow habitually but where breaking the habit does not bring about opprobrium - going to the cinema on Thursday for example and a social rule where breaking the rule is seen as wrong - neglecting to take off one's hat upon entering a church, for example.
We feel in some sense bound by social rules and laws frequently appear to be types of social rule.
There are two perspectives to this: It is from this internal sense that the law acquires its normative quality. The obedience by the populace of a rule is called efficacy.
No law can be said to be efficacious unless followed by the majority of the populace.
Yet, the officials must use the internal aspect and accept the standards as guiding their behaviour in addition to also guiding the behaviour of other officials. Hart's Empirical Legal System in "The Concept of Law"[ edit ] Hart believed law is the union of primary rules rules of conduct and secondary rules empowering rules.
Thus, primary rules construct legal obligations and consequences when they are disobeyed. A good example of a primary rule is the law against murder; it prohibits a person from killing and attaches consequences for committing, attempting to commit, and conspiring to commit the crime. Each kind of secondary rule addresses a separate one of those three issues, yet all are interdependent.
For a rule to be valid is to recognize it as passing all the tests provided by the rule of recognition. The next best thing is to make sure that the system does not remain at a static quality but instead is dynamic and progressive.
The remedy for the static quality of the regime of primary rules are rules of change. Rules of change range in complexity:The Concept of Law (ISBN ) is the most famous work of the legal philosopher H.
L. A. Hart. It was first published in and develops Hart's theory of legal positivism (the view that laws are rules made by human beings and that there is no inherent or necessary connection between law and morality) within the framework of analytic philosophy.
Anthony J. Sebok's Legal Positivism in American Jurisprudence PDF. This ebook is either a piece of highbrow heritage and a contribution to criminal philosophy.
Hart’s version of legal positivism eschewed transcendental arguments but took seriously the same basic problem that animated Kelsen’s theory of law. H.L.A. Hart. Law's Empire is a text in legal philosophy by the late Oxford scholar Ronald Dworkin which continues his criticism of the philosophy of legal positivism as promoted by H.L.A.
Hart during the middle to late 20th century. The book notably introduces Dworkin's Judge Hercules as an idealized version of a jurist with extraordinary legal skills who is able to challenge various predominating.
Some of these cookies are used for visitor analysis, others are essential to making our site function properly and improve the user experience.