Thomas Hobbes is legal positivists. In an attempt to solve the problem of interpretation, legal positivists conclude that there is only one way to interpret a law. According to Hobbes ' theory of legislation, it is the people who enforce the law that decide what it means. Hobbes viewed law somewhat negatively, arguing that the nature of the law is a restraint on
b.2.1. The Divine Intellect God causes things by His knowledge. Having this question answered by St. Thomas, the argument of which leaned towards the discussion of the divine causality through His knowledge. In the previous discussion, it is concluded that the esse of God is His own act of understanding. With this, it can be said that “He must understand Himself perfectly, which includes a perfect understanding of all that He causes, which is everything.” It is understood, then, that inasmuch as we understand that the perfection of understanding is in God, the understanding of His creatures can be also attributed to Him perfectly.
H.L.A. Hart, a legal Positivist, and Lon L. Fuller, who was a natural law theorist, engaged in debates between these two traditions of Jurisprudence. In his 1958 paper ‘Positivism and the Separation of Morals’, Hart maintained that positivism is a theory of the nature of law, not a theory of how individuals should reason when approaching the law. Hart was influenced by his predecessors, Jeremy Bentham and John Austin; he mainly defended the insistence on the lack of necessary connection between law and morality and highlighted that legal positivism includes nothing more than ‘the contention that there is no necessary connection between law and morality.' Harts positivism has been criticised over the years.
authority, or state, is in the business of ensuring compliance with its dictates by means of the official use of coercive power. A state is morally legitimate only if it is justified in using coercion as a means of ensuring compliance with its laws. But, Dworkin insists, the use of such coercion is justified only if there is a general moral obligation to obey the law. Thus any argument for the legitimacy of the state must demonstrate the existence of a general obligation to obey the law. Dworkin argues that there are at least possible legitimate states, because there are attainable circumstances under which such an obligation would obtain.
14: 6). This shows how the Church received the truth about human life as a gift God the Father The true meaning of life, therefore, is a person: Jesus Christ. The ultimate answers to man's questions about pain, suffering of the innocent, and death are found in Christ's Passion, Death and Resurrection (n. 12). The truth communicated by Christ is the absolutely valid source of the meaning of human life (n. 12). All human creatures, not just philosophers, have the right to receive the truth about their existence and destiny (n. 38).
Austin uses utilitarianism to form the basis of his theory which in turn lay down the foundation of modern positive law. He felt that the law should not be impacted by morals and we should therefore keep law and morality separate. He believed that when judging laws on a moral basis, it caused a subjective standpoint and could potentially lead to anarchy. To avoid the subjective approach that may be achieved by applying other theories – such as the neutral theory – positive law provides an objective standard and a legal norm which can be applied impartially to all individuals. The
Weak discretion is when the standard cannot be applied in a mechanical way. There’s a need to evaluate what the standard means in a new case. In weak discretion, there is no gap in the law. Strong discretion does not exist for judges. Weak discretion is part of the judicial role.
It is for this reason that a lawyer who solely adheres to the standard conception cannot always be said to be acting ethical. The opposing theory therefore is to affirm a level of moral activism onto the lawyer’s role; the lawyer owes a duty not only to the client but also a fidelity to the
On the other hand Legal Positivism theory states that law is made by humans and has nothing to do with morality or justice. According to Herbert Lionel Hart, a prominent figure in legal positivism, ?valid legal rules is exhaustive of ?the law,? so that if someone?s case is not clearly covered by such a rule (because there is none that seem appropriate, or those that seem appropriate are vague, or for some other reason) then that case cannot be decided by ?applying the law.? It must be decided by some official, like a judge, ?exercising his discretion.?? [footnoteRef:1] Thus, Hart believes that judges should have some room in applying the law by using their discretion.
It is written to grant every man the opportunity to follow the good. It is known through practical reason and made self-evident by every man’s birth. Man has the ability or capacity to recognize truth, goodness and beauty through this natural law inscribed by God into the soul of each human person. Natural law cannot be over written or silenced in time. It is the knowledge of true good given to man by the Creator to provide a threshold for pure happiness.