4.2 KiB
| title | chunk | source | category | tags | date_saved | instance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jurisprudence | 2/8 | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jurisprudence | reference | science, encyclopedia | 2026-05-05T03:58:04.446884+00:00 | kb-cron |
Ancient jurisprudence begins with various Dharmaśāstra texts of India. Dharmasutras of Āpastaṃba and Baudhāyana are examples. In Ancient China, the Daoists, Confucians, and Legalists all had competing theories of jurisprudence. Jurisprudence in ancient Rome had its origins with the periti—experts in the jus mos maiorum (traditional law), a body of oral laws and customs. Praetors established a working body of laws by judging whether or not singular cases were capable of being prosecuted either by the edicta, the annual pronunciation of prosecutable offences, or in extraordinary situations, additions made to the edicta. A iudex (originally a magistrate, later a private individual appointed to judge a specific case) would then prescribe a remedy according to the facts of the case. The sentences of the iudex were supposed to be simple interpretations of the traditional customs, but—apart from considering what traditional customs applied in each case—soon developed a more equitable interpretation, coherently adapting the law to newer social exigencies. The law was then adjusted to reflect evolving institutiones (legal concepts) while remaining in the traditional mode. Praetors were replaced in the 3rd century BC by a laical body of prudentes. Admission to this body was conditional upon proof of competence or experience. Under the Roman Empire, schools of law were created, and the practice of the law became more academic. From the early Roman Empire to the 3rd century, a relevant body of literature was produced by groups of scholars, including the Proculians and Sabinians. The scientific nature of the studies was unprecedented in ancient times. After the 3rd century, juris prudentia became a more bureaucratic activity, with few notable authors. It was during the Eastern Roman Empire (5th century) that legal studies were once again undertaken in depth, and it is from this cultural movement that Justinian's Corpus Juris Civilis was born. Modern jurisprudence began in the 18th century and was based on the first principles of natural law, civil law, and the law of nations.
== Natural law == Natural law holds that there are rational, objective limits to the power of rulers, the foundations of law are accessible through reason, and it is from these laws of nature that human laws gain force. The moral theory of natural law asserts that law is inherent in nature and constitutive of morality, at least in part, and that an objective moral order, external to human legal systems, underlies natural law. On this view, while legislators can enact and even successfully enforce immoral laws, such laws are legally invalid. The maxim captures the view: "an unjust law is no law at all", where 'unjust' means 'contrary to the natural law.' Natural law theory has medieval origins in the philosophy of Thomas Aquinas, especially in his Treatise on law. In the late 20th century, John Finnis revived interest in the theory and offered a modern reworking. For one, Finnis has argued that the maxim "an unjust law is no law at all" is a poor guide to the classical Thomist position. In its general sense, natural law theory may be compared to both state-of-nature law and general law understood as analogous to the laws of physical science. Natural law is often contrasted with positive law, which treats law as the product of human activity and volition. Another approach to natural-law jurisprudence generally asserts that human law must respond to compelling reasons for action. There are two readings of the natural-law jurisprudential stance.
The strong natural law thesis holds that if a human law fails to be in response to compelling reasons, then it is not properly a "law" at all. This is captured, imperfectly, in the famous maxim: lex iniusta non est lex (an unjust law is no law at all). The weak natural law thesis holds that if a human law fails to be in response to compelling reasons, then it can still be called a "law", but it must be recognised as a defective law.
=== Aristotle ===