Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-558cb97cc8-kfd6t Total loading time: 0.291 Render date: 2022-10-06T05:29:14.867Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "useRatesEcommerce": false, "displayNetworkTab": true, "displayNetworkMapGraph": true, "useSa": true } hasContentIssue false

2 - Jurisprudence and the Individual: Bridging the General and the Particular

from Part One - Rights, Obligations and Responsibilities

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 March 2012

Abhik Majumdar
Affiliation:
National Law University, Orissa
Get access

Summary

Positivism has often been compared to the revolution brought about in the natural sciences by Galileo, Newton, Dalton and their ilk. Before them, scientists confined their attention to the question ‘why’ – why, for example, did things fall down and not up, why did a moving body come to a stop, why did a stone fall faster than a feather, and so on. Philosophers like Aristotle sought to answer the questions by saying that it was the inherent nature of bodies to fall and stay at rest, and that heavier bodies tended to fall faster than lighter things.

Around the time of the Renaissance, however, thinkers realised that their insistence on the question ‘why’ was misplaced. They instead began to examine the question ‘how’ – as in how bodies fell, how moving bodies came to a standstill, and so on. Doing so, they came up with a set of rules explaining natural phenomenon that were both logically consistent and in agreement with observed facts.

Similarly, prior to the advent of positivism, legal thinkers tried to construe the law in terms of its purpose. They postulated that it was a means to give effect to divine will, justice, morality and so forth. Consequently, many held that laws that did not conform to these purposes were not laws at all, that is, they were devoid of legal sanction.

The positivists, on the other hand, realised that a law's objective has little bearing on its validity.

Type
Chapter
Information
Applied Ethics and Human Rights
Conceptual Analysis and Contextual Applications
, pp. 33 - 50
Publisher: Anthem Press
Print publication year: 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×