Understanding Jurisprudence
豆瓣
an introduction to legal theory
Raymond Wacks
简介
With its clear and entertaining writing style, Understanding Jurisprudence is the perfect guide for students new to legal theory and looking for an accessible introduction to the subject.
Key theories and theorists are introduced in a compact and easy-to-read format, offering an engaging account of the central ideas without oversimplification. Key quotes from leading scholars are included throughout the text, introducing you to their work and its impact on legal philosophy, while further reading suggestions help you to navigate the broad range of literature available in this area. Each chapter concludes with a series of critical questions designed to encourage you to think analytically about the law and the key ideas and debates which surround it.
Professor Wacks is an experienced teacher of jurisprudence and excels in providing a concise, student-friendly introduction to the subject, without avoiding the subtleties of this fascinating discipline.
目录
Machine generated contents note:
1. What's it all about?
1.1. analgesic?
1.2. Reading
1.3. Why jurisprudence?
1.4. Descriptive, normative, and critical legal theory
1.5. Is eating people wrong?
1.6. rule of law
1.6.1. Dicey
1.6.2. Modern approaches
1.7. point of legal theory
2. Natural law and morality
2.1. Classical natural law theory
2.1.1. Plato and Aristotle
2.1.2. St Thomas Aquinas
2.2. Contemporary natural law theory
2.3. Natural law in political philosophy
2.3.1. Hobbes
2.3.2. Locke
2.3.3. Rousseau
2.4. decline of natural law theory
2.5. revival of natural law theory
2.6. John Finnis
2.7. Hard and soft natural law?
2.8. Moral realism
2.9. Critique
2.10. Law and morality
2.10.1. Natural law v positivism
2.10.2. Hart v Fuller
2.10.3. Hart v Devlin
2.11. Judicial morality: a case study
2.11.1. Moral questions
2.11.2. Semantic questions
2.11.3. Public or private morality?
2.11.4. judge's duty
2.11.5. judge's choice
2.11.6. judge's surrender
2.11.7. judge and the lawyer
2.12. Questions
2.13. Further reading
3. Classical legal positivism
3.1. What is legal positivism?
3.1.1. What legal positivism is not
3.2. Jeremy Bentham: the Luther of jurisprudence?
3.2.1. In search of determinacy
3.2.2. Judge & Co
3.2.3. Codification
3.3. John Austin: naive empiricist?
3.31. Imperatives
3.3.2. Laws properly so called
3.3.3. Law and power
3.4. Bentham and Austin compared
3.4.1. Their general approaches
3.4.2. definition of law
3.4.3. Commands
3.4.4. Sovereignty
3.4.5. Sanctions
3.5. Questions
3.6. Further reading
4. Modern legal positivism
4.1. foundations
4.2. HLA Hart
4.2.1. Hart as legal positivist
4.2.2. Law and language
4.2.3. Law as a system of rules
4.2.4. Social rules
4.2.5. Secondary rules
4.2.6. rule of recognition
4.2.7. existence of a legal system
4.2.8. `internal point of view'
4.2.9. judicial function
4.210. `An essay in descriptive sociology'?
4.211. Critique
4.3. Hans Kelsen
4.3.1. Unadulterated law
4.3.2. hierarchy of norms
4.3.3. Grundnorm
4.3.4. Validity, efficacy, and revolution
4.3.5. International law
4.3.6. Kelsen and Kant
4.3.7. Democracy and the rule of law
4.3.8. Critique
4.4. Joseph Raz
4.4.1. `sources thesis'
4.4.2. Practical reason
44.3. Committed and detached statements
4.4.4. Critique
4.5. Hard and soft positivism
4.6. Questions
4.7. Further reading
5. Dworkin and the moral integrity of law
5.1. overview
5.2. assault on positivism
5.2.1. Principles and policies
5.2.2. Hercules and hard cases
5.2.3. One right answer
5.2.4. semantic sting
5.2.5. rights thesis
5.2.6. Law as literature
5.2.7. Law as integrity
5.2.8. Community
5.3. Equality
5.4. Good lives and living well
5.5. assault on Dworkin
5.6. Questions
5.7. Further reading
6. Legal realism
6.1. What are realists realistic about?
6.2. American Realism
6.2.1. Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr.
6.2.2. Karl Llewellyn
6.2.3. Jerome Frank
6.2.4. American realist method
6.3. Scandinavian realists
6.3.1. Alf Ross
6.3.2. Karl Olivecrona
6.3.3. Critique
6.4. Realism and psychology
6.5. Questions
6.6. Further reading
7. Law and social theory
7.1. What is a sociological perspective?
7.2. Roscoe Pound
7.2.1. Social interests and `jural postulates'
7.2.2. Critique of Pound
7.3. Eugen Ehrlich
7.4. Emile Durkheim
7.4.1. Law and social solidarity
7.4.2. function of punishment
7.4.3. Critique of Durkheim
7.5. Max Weber
7.5.1. Weber's typology of law
7.5.2. Weber's theory of legitimate domination
7.5.3. Capitalism and law
7.5.4. Critique of Weber
7.6. Karl Marx
7.6.1. Historicism
7.6.2. Base and superstructure
7.6.3. Ideology
7.6.4. Goodbye to law?
7.6.5. Legal fetishism
7.6.6. Conflict or consensus?
7.7. Michel Foucault
7.7.1. Power
7.7.2. law
7.7.3. Critique
7.8. Jurgen Habermas
7.8.1. modern state
7.8.2. law
7.8.3. Critique
7.9. Autopoiesis
7.10. Whither the sociology of law?
7.11. Questions
7.12. Further reading
8. Historical and anthropological jurisprudence
8.1. Why do legal systems differ?
8.2. historical school
8.2.1. Savigny
8.3. Sir Henry Maine
8.3.1. evolution of law
8.3.2. Natural law
8.3.3. Fictions
8.3.4. Critique
8.4. Anthropological jurisprudence
8.4.1. `Law' in tribal societies
8.4.2. Bronislaw Malinowski
8.4.3. EAdamson Hoebel
8.4.4. Max Gluckman
8.4.5. Paul Bohannan
8.4.6. Leopold Pospisil
8.4.7. Other theorists
8.5. Legal pluralism
8.6. Questions
8.7. Further reading
9. Theories of justice
9.1. Utilitarianism
9.1.1. Consequences
9.1.2. Preferences
9.1.3. Critique of utilitarianism
9.2. economic analysis of law
9.2.1. Critique
9.3. John Rawls
9.3.1. rejection of utilitarianism
9.3.2. Social contractarianism
9.3.3. original position
9.3.4. two principles of justice
9.3.5. Reconsideration
9.3.6. Critique of Rawls
9.4. Robert Nozick
9.5. Questions
9.6. Further reading
10. Rights
10.1. What is a right?
10.2. Theories of rights
10.2.1. Right-based theories
10.3. Human rights
10.3.1. Communitarianism
10.3.2. Relativism
10.3.3. Utilitarianism
10.3.4. Socialism
10.3.5. Legal positivism
10.3.6. Critical theory
10.4. future of human rights
10.5. Animal rights
10.5.1. Early philosophical influences
10.5.2. Utilitarianism
10.5.3. Can animals have rights?
10.5.4. Social contractarianism
10.5.5. Intrinsic worth
10.5.6. rights of animals
10.6. Questions
10.7. Further reading
11. Why obey the law?
11.1. terms of the debate
11.1.1. prima facie duty?
11.1.2. Justifying the duty
11.2. Questions
11.3. Further reading
12. Why punish?
12.1. Justifying punishment
12.2. Retributivism
12.2.1. Weak and strong retributivists
12.2.2. Critique
12.3. Consequentialism
12.4. Critique
12.5. Restorative justice
12.6. Critique
12.7. Communication
12.8. Critique
12.9. Questions
12.10. Further reading
13. Critical legal theory
13.1. Critical Legal Studies
13.1.1. Trashing CLS?
13.2. Postmodern legal theory
13.21. What is it?
13.2.2. death of the subject
13.2.3. Jacques Lacan
13.2.4. Jacques Derrida
13.2.5. Foucault and Habermas
13.2.6. postmodern agenda
13.2.7. Language
13.2.8. Critical theory and individual rights
13.2.9. Critique
13.3. Questions
13.4. Further reading
14. Feminist and critical race theory
14.1. Feminist legal theories
14.2. Origins of feminism
14.3. Legal feminisms
14.3.1. Liberal feminism
14.3.2. Radical feminism
14.3.3. Postmodern feminism
14.3.4. Difference feminism
14.3.5. Other feminisms
14.4. Critique
14.5. Critical race theory
14.5.1. CRT and feminist theory
14.5.2. CRT and postmodernism
14.6. Questions
14.7. Further reading
15. Jurisprudence understood?.
