Natural Law vs. Positivism
The viewpoint of law is a complex and in depth research, which requires an intimate knowledge of the legal procedure in general in addition to a philosophical mind. For centuries, the scope and nature of law has actually been debated and argued from different view points, and intense intellectual conversation has developed from the basic question of ‘what is law’. In reaction, a number of major schools of thought have been born, which the natural law scholars and positivists are two of the most noteworthy. These 2 camps hold strictly contrasting views over the function and function of law in particular circumstances, and have provided in themselves platforms for criticism and debated which remain to be relevant today.
Although the categories of natural law and positivism are frequently made use of, it is very important to remember that they cover a really wide range of scholastic viewpoint. Even within each camp, there are those diverting towards more liberal or more conservative understandings, and there is also naturally a grey area. Having said that, academics and philosophers can be covered by one of the classifications on the basis of certain fundamental concepts within their writings and opinions.
Natural law has actually always been linked to ultra-human considerations, that is to say a spiritual or moral impact determinant of their understandings of the way law runs. One of the starting principles is that an immoral law can be no law at all, on the basis that a government requires ethical authority to be able to enact laws. For this factor, natural law theories have actually been used to validate anarchy and condition at ground level. This had lead to widespread criticism of the natural law concepts, which have had to be fine-tuned and established to fit with contemporary thinking. On the flip side, natural law has been utilized as a definitive method of serving ‘justice’ to war criminals and former-dictators after their reign.
A few of the best criticisms of natural law have originated from the positivist camp. Positivism holds at its centre the belief that law is not influenced by morality, but in essence is the source of ethical considerations. Because morality is a subjective idea, positivism recommends that the law is the source of morality, which no extra-legal considerations should be taken in to account. Positivism has been criticised for allowing extremism and unfair actions through law. It has actually also been suggested that positivism in its strictest sense is flawed because it neglects the depth and breadth of language in legal enactment, which suggests the positive law can be read in different lights based on varying meanings of the same word. Regardless of this, positivism has been viewed as one of the fundamental legal theories in the advancement of contemporary legal philosophy over the last couple of years, and is winning extensive favour through a modern academic revival.
Natural law and positivism have actually been the subject of a continuous academic argument into the nature of law and its role within society. Both respective legal schools have actually criticised and developed on one and others theories and principles to develop a more advanced philosophical understanding of the legal construct. Although the debate is set to continue with a brand-new generation of appealing legal theorists, both natural law and positivism have gained widespread regard for their consistency and close analyses of the structure of law.
PPPPP
Word Count 556
