The philosophy of law, or the science which treats of the principles of positive law

and legal relations. “The term is wrongly applied to actual systems of law, or to
current views of law, or to suggestions for its amendment, but is the name of a
science. This science is a formal, or analytical, rather than a material, one. It is the
science of actual or positive law. It is wrongly divided into ‘general’ and ‘particular,’
or into ‘philosophical’ and ‘historical.’ It may therefore be deigned as the formal
science of positive law.” Ho 11. Jur. 12. In the proper sense of the word,
“jurisprudence” is the science of law, namely, that science which has for its function
to ascertain the principles on which legal rules are based, so as not only to classify
those rules in their proper order, and show the relation in which they stand to one
another, but also to settle the manner in which new or doubtful cases should be
brought under the appropriate rules. Jurisprudence is more a formal than a material
science. It has no direct concern with questions of moral or political policy, for they
fall under the province of ethics and legislation; but, when a new or doubtful case
arises to which two different rules seem, when taken literally, to be equally
applicable, it may be, and often is, the function of jurisprudence to consider the
ultimate effect which would be produced if each rule were applied to an indefinite
number of similar cases, and to choose that rule which, when so applied, will produce
the greatest advantage to the community. Sweet.

Approaches to the study of Jurisprudence- There are two ways

1. Empirical- Facts to Generalization.

2. A Priori- Start with Generalization in light of which the facts are examined.

Significance and Utility of the Study of Jurisprudence

1. This subject has its own intrinsic interest and value because this is a subject of
serious scholarship and research; researchers in Jurisprudence contribute to the
development of society by having repercussions in the whole legal, political and
social school of thoughts. One of the tasks of this subject is to construct and elucidate
concepts serving to render the complexities of law more manageable and more
rational. It is the belief of this subject that the theory can help to improve practice.
2. Jurisprudence also has an educational value. It helps in the logical analysis of the
legal concepts and it sharpens the logical techniques of the lawyer. The study of
jurisprudence helps to combat the lawyer’s occupational view of formalism which
leads to excessive concentration on legal rules for their own sake and disregard of the
social function of the law.

3. The study of jurisprudence helps to put law in its proper context by considering the
needs of the society and by taking note of the advances in related and relevant
disciplines.

4. Jurisprudence can teach the people to look if not forward, at least sideways and
around them and realize that answers to a new legal problem must be found by a
consideration of present social needs and not in the wisdom of the past.

5. Jurisprudence is the eye of law and the grammar of law because it throws light on
basic ideas and fundamental principles of law. Therefore, by understanding the nature
of law, its concepts and distinctions, a lawyer can find out the actual rule of law. It
also helps in knowing the language, grammar, the basis of treatment and assumptions
upon which the subject rests. Therefore, some logical training is necessary for a
lawyer which he can find from the study of Jurisprudence.

6. It trains the critical faculties of the mind of the students so that they can dictate
fallacies and use accurate legal terminology and expression.

7. It helps a lawyer in his practical work. A lawyer always has to tackle new problems
every day. This he can handle through his knowledge of Jurisprudence which trains
his mind to find alternative legal channels of thought.

8. Jurisprudence helps the judges and lawyers in ascertaining the true meaning of the
laws passed by the legislators by providing the rules of interpretation. Therefore, the
study of jurisprudence should not be confined to the study of positive laws but also
must include normative study i.e. that study should deal with the improvement of law
in the context of prevailing socio-economic and political philosophies of time, place
and circumstances.

9. Professor Dias said that ‘the study of jurisprudence is an opportunity for the lawyer
to bring theory and life into focus, for it concerns human thought in relation to social
existence’.

Relationship of Jurisprudence with other Social Sciences

1. Sociology and Jurisprudence- There is a branch called as Sociological

Jurisprudence. This branch is based on social theories. It is essentially concerned with
the influence of law on the society at large particularly when we talk about social
welfare. The approach from sociological perspective towards law is different from a
lawyer’s perspective. The study of sociology has helped Jurisprudence in its
approach. Behind all legal aspects, there is always something social. However,
Sociology of Law is different from Sociological Jurisprudence.

2. Jurisprudence and Psychology- No human science can be described properly

without a thorough knowledge of Human Mind. Hence, Psychology has a close
connection with Jurisprudence. Relationship of Psychology and Law is established in
the branch of Criminological Jurisprudence. Both psychology and jurisprudence are
interested in solving questions such as motive behind a crime, criminal personality,
reasons for crime etc.

3. Jurisprudence and Ethics- Ethics has been defined as the science of Human
Conduct. It strives for ideal Human Behaviour. This is how Ethics and Jurisprudence
areinterconnected

a. Ideal Moral Code- This could be found in relation to Natural Law.

b. Positive Moral Code- This could be found in relation to Law as the Command of
theSovereign.

c. Ethics is concerned with good human conduct in the light of public opinion.
d. Jurisprudence is related with Positive Morality in so far as law is the instrument to
assert positive ethics.

e. Jurisprudence believes that Legislations must be based on ethical principles. It is

not to be divorced from Human principles.

f. Ethics believes that No law is good unless it is based on sound principles of human
value.

g. A Jurist should be adept in this science because unless he studies ethics, he won’t
be able to criticize the law.

h. However, Austin disagreed with this relationship.

4. Jurisprudence and Economics- Economics studies man’s efforts in satisfying his

wants and producing and distributing wealth. Both Jurisprudence and Economics are
sciences and both aim to regulate lives of the people. Both of them try to develop the
society and improve life of an individual. Karl Marx was a pioneer in this regard.

5. Jurisprudence and History- History studies past events. Development of Law for
administration of justice becomes sound if we know the history and background of
legislations and the way law has evolved. The branch is known as Historical
Jurisprudence.

6. Jurisprudence and Politics- In a politically organized society, there are regulations

and laws which lay down authoritatively what a man may and may not do. Thus, there
is a deep connected between politics and Jurisprudence.
Austin- He said that “Science of Jurisprudence is concerned with Positive Laws that
is laws strictly so called. It has nothing to do with the goodness or badness of law.

This has two aspects attached to it:

1. General Jurisprudence- It includes such subjects or ends of law as are common to
all system.
2. Particular Jurisprudence- It is the science of any actual system of law or any
portion of it.

Basically, in essence they are same but in scope they are different.

Salmond’s Criticism of Austin

He said that for a concept to fall within the category of ‘General Jurisprudence’, it
should be common in various systems of law. This is not always true as there could be
concepts that fall in neither of the two categories.

Holland’s Criticism of Austin

He said that it is only the material which is particular and not the science itself.

Holland’s Definition- Jurisprudence means the formal science of positive laws. It is

an analytical science rather than a material science.

1. He defined the term positive law. He said that Positive Law means the general
rule of external human action enforced by a sovereign political authority.

2. We can see that, he simply added the word ‘formal’ in Austin’s definition. Formal
here means that we study only the form and not the essence. We study only the
external features and do not go into the intricacies of the subject. According to him,
how positive law is applied and how it is particular is not the concern of
Jurisprudence.
3. The reason for using the word ‘Formal Science’ is that it describes only the form
or the external sight of the subject and not its internal contents. According to Holland,
Jurisprudence is not concerned with the actual material contents of law but only with
its fundamental conceptions. Therefore, Jurisprudence is a Formal Science.

4. This definition has been criticized by Gray and Dr. Jenks. According to them,
Jurisprudence is a formal science because it is concerned with the form, conditions,
social life, human relations that have grown up in the society and to which society
attaches legal significance.

5. Holland said that Jurisprudence is a science because it is a systematized and

properly co-ordinated knowledge of the subject of intellectual enquiry. The term
positive law confines the enquiry to these social relations which are regulated by the
rules imposed by the States and enforced by the Courts of law. Therefore, it is a
formal science of positive law.

6. Formal as a prefix indicates that the science deals only with the purposes, methods
and ideas on the basis of the legal system as distinct from material science which
deals only with the concrete details of law.

7. This definition has been criticized on the ground that this definition is concerned
only with the form and not the intricacies.

Salmond- He said that Jurisprudence is Science of Law. By law he meant law of

the land or civil law. He divided Jurisprudence into two parts:

1. Generic- This includes the entire body of legal doctrines.

2. Specific- This deals with the particular department or any portion of the doctrines.
‘Specific’ is further divided into three parts:

1. Analytical, Expository or Systematic- It deals with the contents of an actual legal

system existing at any time, past or the present.

2. Historical- It is concerned with the legal history and its development

3. Ethical- According to him, the purpose of any legislation is to set forth laws as it
ought to be. It deals with the ‘ideal’ of the legal system and the purpose for which it
exists.

Criticism of Salmond- Critics say that it is not an accurate definition. Salmond only
gave the structure and failed to provide any clarity of thought.

Keeton- He considered Jurisprudence as the study and systematic arrangement of

the general principles of law. According to him, Jurisprudence deals with the
distinction between Public and Private Laws and considers the contents of principle
departments of law.

Roscoe Pound- He described Jurisprudence as the science of lawusing the

term ‘law’ in juridical sense as denoting the body of principles recognized or
enforced by public and regular tribunals in the Administration of Justice.

Dias and Hughes- They believed Jurisprudence as any thought or writing about
law rather than a technical exposition of a branch of law itself.

Conclusion- Thus, we can safely say that Jurisprudence is the study of

fundamental legal principles.

Scope of Jurisprudence- After reading all the above mentioned definitions, we

would find that Austin was the only one who tried to limit the scope of
jurisprudence. He tried to segregate morals and theology from the study of
jurisprudence.
However, the study of jurisprudence cannot be circumscribed because it includes all
human conduct in the State and the Society.