Holmes views on law seen as a pragmatist? By definition the term pragmatism is a "reasonable and logical way of doing things or of thinking about problems that is based on dealing with specific situations instead of on ideas and theories". Law is considered to no be of principal according to Holmes, because morality isn't a source, nor is the natural way of law. However, in the midst of the confusion, Holmes seems to be swayed by both of those sides when it comes to law while using common sense to solve issues. When it comes to the courts he endorses the view as to whatever the courts decide and whatever there precedents are it's the rule.
General approaches to law are either realistic or philosophical. The realistic approach would be to take the moral side of things. The positivist view is that law doesn't borrow from moral but it has rules.
Is there a productive way to approach law that is neither moralistic or positive, where would the happy medium come from?
No comments:
Post a Comment