Analysis Of The Book ' Central Of Legal Positivism '

3001 Words13 Pages
As Nigel Simmonds puts it in his book, Central Issues in Jurisprudence, Hart was one of the greatest exponents of Legal Positivism in the mid twentieth – century. In his careers’ most famous work, The Concept of Law , Hart explains the nature of law in relation to the framework of legal thought while also outlining the essential characteristics of a robust legal system. As an introduction to his work, Hart explains that his theory is based upon the works of Jeremy Bentham and Jane Austin who were some of the earlier proponents of Legal Positivism but in such an effect where it aims to provide “An improved analysis of the distinctive structure of a municipal legal system and a better understanding of the resemblances and differences…show more content…
He further explained that not only did this dangerously conflate two different enterprises vis-à-vis the issues at hand but also that law were ought to be measured against the standard of utility rather than as an explanation backed by misguided beliefs. For Austin, Bentham’s disciple, there was a distinct difference between what Law is and what it ought to be, which was highly synonymous of Bentham’s work. One must not confuse Austin’s work as a briefer, synonymous and more objective version of Bentham’s theory as despite the similarities between their theories there were differences too such as Bentham’s proposition of ‘Complete law that adequately expresses the will of the legislature’ by way of codification as opposed to Austin’s acceptability of judicial law making. This essay aims at briefly explaining the key components of Hart’s theory while constantly comparing and contrasting his propositions with those of his predecessors, Bentham and Austin as the former quintessentially flows from Hart’s aim, the one of providing the world of Jurisprudence with an improved analysis of some of the earlier proposed correlation between law, morality and coercion. This will be later followed by a detailed analysis and subtle criticism, where necessary, of Hart’s theory because the important question pertinent to the validity of his philosophy will be left unanswered if his departure from classical positivism isn’t examined.
Get Access