Academic critics argue that the jurisprudence is too argumentative or too «prescriptive,» simply saying what the law should be and what the law is. It is not the pursuit of knowledge by pure science in the discipline of a recognized academic field. Critics of the bar and the judiciary complain of the opposite: jurisprudence is too academic and not professional enough, fashion-loving, detached from any discipline and of little use to the lawyer or the sitting judge. Legions of critics from cost-conscious law schools complain that paying high salaries to professors with low course loads drives up tuition fees. Many professors themselves have serious reservations about this scientific undertaking. There is a grain of truth in all these complaints. Positive Interesting Right Name Institution Professor Course Date Introduction Normative means being based on what is considered to be the regular or accurate way of doing something (Posner 1981). Positive laws are legal directives duly promulgated by a recognized branch of a presidency. Those of Law and Economics 18(3) 259-272. Posner R. A. (1981). The current situation of case law.
The Yale Law Journal 90(5) 1113-1130. Slaughter A. M. Tulumello A. S. & Wood S. (1998). Theory of International Law and International Relations: A New Generation of Interdisciplinary Science. American Journal of International Law 367-397.
[…] But what about the rest of the critic`s letter? What critics attack as weaknesses are also the strengths of jurisprudence. It is often prescriptive and aims to explain what the law should be as well as to clarify what it is, but this does not detract from its scientific value. Law is more academic than writing dissertations, but that does not detract from their professional value. It lacks a unifying method and a unifying goal, but that does not make it undisciplined. Most law schools are produced in law schools that are part of universities dedicated to the pursuit of knowledge, but law schools are also part of a legal profession committed to the ideal of justice, and even defined by. The scholarship reflects the dual identity of the Law Academy. Normative jurisprudence aims to influence judges, lawyers, legislators or regulators to reform, interpret or preserve existing law in order to make the world a fairer place. Science education aims at interpretations that show what actions justice requires or prohibits. Reformist jurisprudence aims to make the law fairer, not by interpreting existing law, but by advocating for proposed legal reforms. The reformist scholar emphasizes allegations of injustice, or at least combines them with direct appeals to the common good or public policy. Normative science is not subject to the same constraints as a judge`s opinion or a brief written for a client.
It can cover entire areas of law to answer questions that are not raised by individual cases. It seeks fundamental changes in the law, often over a long period of time, but not directly through legal action. His impact is felt through the power of his reasoning on his readership, including students who become clerks, lawyers, judges and legislators. This fellowship is based on the understanding that the work of justice falls directly within the scope and scope of law. It also shows that the work of the civil lawyer requires scientific virtues: deep commitment and rigorous reflection. The academic mission of the Academy of Law is under attack from all sides. Critics include universities that house law schools, the legal profession and banking, lawyers themselves, and cost-conscious critics. What are their complaints? And what is the value of case law? The value of jurisprudence can be better appreciated by imagining a world without it. Law schools would educate students, but not so well. Focusing exclusively on skills would omit lessons on thinking, not to mention how lawyers think.
The law school`s vision of law and advocacy would be atrophied, limited by current practice and not tempered by an ephemeral knowledge of other humanities and social sciences. We would lose the attention and loyalty of graduate students from other countries who value their American law degrees in part because of the breadth and depth of the deeply interdisciplinary legal education they find here — precisely because of the scientific mission of the schools. Judges, legislators and administrators may miss critical commentary on the law and its theoretical underpinnings much more than they think. Without research on grey areas, judges may give less thoughtful opinions.