Schools of Jurisprudence

Schools of Jurisprudence

Edited By Ritika Jonwal | Updated on Jul 02, 2025 05:38 PM IST

The Jurisprudence Law is referred to as the study behind the philosophy of law. Various thinkers and scholars have described it in simpler terms throughout history to better understand the law-making process. The present-day jurisprudence traces its roots back to the 18th century. The present-day jurisprudence mainly revolves around the basic and primary standard of natural law, civil law and the law of nations.

The classification of general jurisprudence is based on the sort of issue that a researcher wants to answer best. It is also classified on the basis of schools of thought or jurisprudential hypotheses. The modern-day rationality of law, which deals with general jurisprudence, provides for the law and the legitimate framework in view of the impending political and social setting in which the law operates today.

Schools of Jurisprudence

Jurisprudence can be described as the analysis and study of law. It attempts to answer the reasoning behind the need for law and the law itself. Therefore, it differs from thinker to thinker depending on a particular person's alternative perception of law. It can be divided into five different schools of law, which are discussed in this article below.

Philosophical School

The philosophical school, often known as the moral school, associates legislation with the precise ideas that it is supposed to achieve. It aims to determine the grounds behind the enactment of a given law. This school's most distinguished scholars include:

  • Grotius (1583-1645)

  • Immanuel Kant (1724-1804)

  • Hegel (1770-1831)

These theorists believe that law is the consequence of human thinking, and they attribute its origin to human identity. These thinkers reject the notion that law is the arbitrary order of a ruler or the government.

It declined, providing an approach to the fundamental privileges of man and state. These scholars proposed the natural law idea, which introduced the concept of a "social contract." Hobbes used the natural law concept to promote reactionary growth and legitimise business as usual in order to maintain peace and protect people from ongoing chaos.

Historical School

The Historical School of Jurisprudence sees the law as the product of the long-term historical progress of the public in general, beginning with social conventions representing ethical standards, monetary necessities, and its relationship to the general population. It thinks that the law is the outcome of the strength and influence of the past. Individual awareness is essential to the law. The voyage of law begins with the general population since there has never been an individual like a sovereign to make laws. The prominent theorists of this school of law consist of

  • Savigny,

  • Sir Henry

  • Edmund Burke.

Savigny is regarded as the primary figure behind the historical school of jurisprudence. He is credited for introducing the Volksgeist theory. This argument demonstrates that the law is based on ordinary individuals' general freedom. Savingy argues that law evolves alongside the creation of nations and continues with the partition of countries. Along these lines, the law maintains a national character in its recognition of persons.

This school places little emphasis on the relationship between law and the state. In spite of this, it assigns prominence to the social structures charged with the law-making power. Meanwhile, the investigative school presupposes the presence of a well-established legal framework.

Realist School

The Realist school has its roots in American jurisprudence. According to Legal Realism, any court decisions must be in line with upcoming financial concerns as well as strategic and quality inquiries. In the United States of America, there is a Realist School of Law. The Realist School promotes sociological jurisprudence, which asserts that the law is a result of social consequences and situations, and views them as judicial choices.

Two main thinkers of this school of law are:

Oliver Holmes

According to Oliver Holmes, the law is what the courts do, not just what they declare. Oliver emphasises action. According to Holmes, "The life of the law has not been the rationale; it has been involvement."

Karl Llewellyn

Karl supported traditional pragmatist thought. It was his judgement that the outlines that serve as the framework for substantive law are significantly less crucial in the true practice of the law than had previously been assumed.

Sociological School

The sociological school of law is the consequence of combining numerous juristic perspectives. The many kinds of this school regard law as a social wonder. According to the ideas of this school, law is a social ability, an outflow of culture concerned with its members' external relationships. The major scholars of this school include:

  • Montesquieu

  • Auguste Comte

  • Herbert Spencer

  • Duguit

  • Rosco Pound

The current school concentrates on the utilitarian aspect of law rather than its philosophical essence. This school of thought sees the law as a social structure that is in harmony with the orders and has a direct impact on society. The historical school responded to the final independence of the nineteenth century by emphasising the Volkegeist spirit of the general populace, proving that legislation and the social situation in which it is created are inextricably linked. Before the nineteenth century, the state was not concerned with people's well-being, welfare, or training. With the start of the nineteenth century, the state became more concerned with a wide range of concerns, including almost every aspect of life and welfare, as a result of the negative impact of a free economy and free business. This implied guidance through the law, requiring legal theory to straighten itself to judge social miracles.

Analytical School

The analytical school of jurisprudence is also known as the Austinian school, named for its founder, John Austin. It is also known as the imperative school since it considers legislation to be the sovereign's directive. Austin proposed the idea of this school, while Bentham established the groundwork for its formation. The Analytical School is said to have been written by Jeremy Bentham. In one of Bentham's publications, he disregarded natural law ideas in favour of a logical discussion of the utility rule. Bentham's concentration on censorial jurisprudence indicates how the natural law impact remained significant. As a result, he proposed utility as the governing principle.

The prominent academics of this school of law include:

  • Austin

  • Kelson

  • Salmond

Analytical school of Jurisprudence can be briefly described in the following pointers:

  1. As a research on the rise of civil law.

  2. It examines the relation between the civil law and other types of law.

  3. An analysis of the logic behind a law.

  4. A record of sources of law from the law continues.

  5. Expounding upon the theory of obligation

  6. Tracing back the roots to legal rights and obligations.

Table: Different Schools for Jurisprudence and Scholars

School of Jurisprudence

Key Principle

Scholars

Philosophical School

This school of jurisprudence concerns itself with the connection of law to specific goals which law is intended to achieve.

Grotius, Immanuel Kant, Hegel

Historical School

This school of jurisprudence contends that the law is the result of a lengthy historical advancement of the general public, dating back to its inception from social custom and depicting ethical standards, monetary necessities, and relationships with the general people.

Savigny, Sir Henry Maine, and Edmund Burke

Realist School

This School of Jurisprudence believes that judicial decisions should be made while keeping in view the financial factors and inquiries of strategy and qualities.

Karl Llewellyn

Sociological School

This school of jurisprudence contends that the law is a social capability resulting from human culture's exterior contact with its members.

Montesquieu, Auguste Comte, Herbert Spencer, Duguit , and Rosco Pound

Analytical School

This school of jurisprudence views law as the direction of the sovereign.

Jeremy Bentham, John Austin, Kelson, and Salmond

Case Law

Animal and Environment Legal Defense Fund vs Union of India and others
The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, while dealing with the present case, tried to correlate the standards of economic supportability and condition assurance. As a result, the court, in its infinite wisdom, concluded that if residents are prohibited from fishing, their jobs will undoubtedly suffer. In the alternative, allowing it will pose an impending harm to nature.

As a result, the Hon'ble Supreme Court asked the concerned woods professionals and formed a board to devise a plan to safeguard the earth's resources while also protecting local jobs. The board was entrusted with keeping an eye on the locals and recommending recommendations that would not be harmful to their interests. They were also entrusted with raising awareness among residents about environmental concerns. The inhabitants were prohibited from accessing other regions.

Conclusion

Jurisprudence is an examination of the process of law formation. It investigates the development, application, and requirements of laws. Jurisprudence examines the theories and practices of understanding in relation to law. It carries an explanatory value. Despite numerous schools of law attempting to eliminate flaws in the lawmaking and enacting systems, there is still a need to link the claim of the goal and justification for the law. Furthermore, legislation should be viewed pragmatically rather than theoretically.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

1. What is jurisprudence?

Jurisprudence can be described as the analysis and study of law-making processes. It is divided into different schools based on the reasoning propounded by the schools for the law itself.

2. What are the different schools of jurisprudence?

There are five different schools of jurisprudence: philosophical school, historical school, realist school, sociological school, and analytical school.

3. Who is the father of modern-day jurisprudence?

Jeremy Bentham is described as the father of modern-day jurisprudence. John Austin took the help of Bentham’s work and explained it further.

4. Which are some notable scholars of different schools of jurisprudence?

Some notable scholars of different schools of jurisprudence are Savigny, Bentham, John Austin, Locke, Hobbes, and Immanuel Kant.

5. Why the study of jurisprudence around law is necessary?

Jurisprudence helps in understanding the law and different considerations which ought to be kept in mind during the law-making process. This helps in making better and more effective laws. The jurisprudence also answers important questions about the need for law.

6. What is the role of judicial discretion in Legal Realism?
Legal Realism emphasizes the significant role of judicial discretion in legal decision-making. It argues that judges often make decisions based on their personal views, social considerations, and desired outcomes, rather than strictly applying legal rules.
7. What is the central idea of Legal Realism?
Legal Realism focuses on how the law actually operates in practice, rather than abstract theories. It emphasizes that judicial decisions are influenced by various factors, including personal beliefs, social context, and practical considerations, not just formal legal rules.
8. What is the "prediction theory" associated with Legal Realism?
The prediction theory, proposed by Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr., suggests that the law is best understood as a prediction of what judges will do in specific cases, rather than as a set of abstract rules.
9. How do different schools of jurisprudence approach the interpretation of laws?
Natural Law advocates for interpreting laws in line with moral principles. Legal Positivism focuses on the literal meaning and legislative intent. Legal Realism considers practical outcomes and social context. Sociological Jurisprudence emphasizes interpreting laws to serve social needs.
10. How does Legal Positivism address the issue of unjust laws?
Legal Positivism maintains that the validity of a law is separate from its moral merit. While a positivist might acknowledge that a law is unjust, they would still consider it legally valid if enacted through proper procedures by a recognized authority.
11. What are the main schools of jurisprudence?
The main schools of jurisprudence are Natural Law, Legal Positivism, Legal Realism, and Sociological Jurisprudence. Each school offers a different perspective on the nature, source, and purpose of law in society.
12. How does Sociological Jurisprudence view the relationship between law and society?
Sociological Jurisprudence sees law as a social phenomenon that both shapes and is shaped by society. It emphasizes the importance of studying law in its social context and considering its practical effects on society.
13. What is the "separation thesis" in Legal Positivism?
The separation thesis in Legal Positivism argues that there is no inherent or necessary connection between law and morality. It maintains that the validity of a law depends on its source and form, not its moral content.
14. How does Natural Law theory explain the concept of "unjust laws"?
Natural Law theory argues that laws contradicting universal moral principles or human reason are not truly laws. This perspective allows for the concept of "unjust laws" that may be legally valid but morally illegitimate.
15. How does Sociological Jurisprudence differ from traditional legal analysis?
Sociological Jurisprudence goes beyond traditional legal analysis by considering the social impact of laws, examining how laws function in society, and advocating for law reform based on social needs and realities.
16. How does Natural Law theory differ from Legal Positivism?
Natural Law theory argues that law is derived from universal moral principles and human reason, while Legal Positivism contends that law is a human creation, separate from morality, and based on the rules enacted by legitimate authorities.
17. What is the concept of "legal pluralism" and how does it relate to schools of jurisprudence?
Legal pluralism recognizes the coexistence of multiple legal systems within a single society. It challenges the state-centric view of law emphasized by Legal Positivism and aligns more closely with Sociological Jurisprudence's focus on diverse social norms.
18. What is the concept of "legal formalism" and how do different schools of jurisprudence view it?
Legal formalism is the idea that legal decisions can be deduced from abstract rules without considering social or moral factors. Legal Positivism partially embraces this view, while Legal Realism and Sociological Jurisprudence strongly reject it.
19. How does Legal Positivism explain the concept of legal validity?
Legal Positivism explains legal validity through the idea of a "rule of recognition" - a fundamental rule that sets criteria for identifying valid laws within a legal system. Validity depends on whether a law meets these criteria, not on its moral content.
20. What is the concept of "legal reasoning" and how do different schools approach it?
Legal reasoning is the process of applying legal rules to specific cases. Natural Law emphasizes moral reasoning. Legal Positivism focuses on logical deduction from rules. Legal Realism considers practical outcomes. Sociological Jurisprudence incorporates social science insights.
21. What is the "is-ought problem" in jurisprudence?
The "is-ought problem," introduced by David Hume, questions whether normative statements (what ought to be) can be derived from descriptive statements (what is). This problem challenges Natural Law theory's attempt to derive moral laws from observations of nature.
22. How does Legal Positivism explain the authority of law?
Legal Positivism explains the authority of law through the concept of a "rule of recognition" - a social rule that identifies which norms are valid laws within a legal system. This authority is based on social acceptance rather than moral merit.
23. How does Sociological Jurisprudence view the purpose of law?
Sociological Jurisprudence sees the purpose of law as serving social needs and promoting social welfare. It emphasizes that law should be a tool for social engineering, adapting to changing societal conditions and addressing social problems.
24. What is the concept of "living law" in Sociological Jurisprudence?
"Living law," introduced by Eugen Ehrlich, refers to the norms and practices that actually govern social life, often distinct from formal legal rules. Sociological Jurisprudence emphasizes studying and incorporating this living law into formal legal systems.
25. What is the concept of "social solidarity" in Sociological Jurisprudence?
Social solidarity in Sociological Jurisprudence, emphasized by thinkers like Émile Durkheim, refers to the cohesive force that binds society together. Law is seen as a mechanism for maintaining and promoting this solidarity.
26. How does Legal Positivism explain the concept of legal systems?
Legal Positivism views legal systems as hierarchical structures of rules, with a fundamental "rule of recognition" at the top. This rule determines which norms count as law within the system, providing a positivist explanation for legal validity and authority.
27. What is the concept of "natural rights" in Natural Law theory?
Natural rights in Natural Law theory are fundamental, inalienable rights that individuals possess by virtue of being human. These rights are considered to exist independently of positive law and are often used to justify or critique existing legal systems.
28. What is the "indeterminacy thesis" in Legal Realism?
The indeterminacy thesis in Legal Realism argues that legal rules and precedents are often insufficient to determine the outcome of a case. It suggests that legal reasoning alone cannot predict judicial decisions, as other factors play a significant role.
29. How does Sociological Jurisprudence contribute to law reform?
Sociological Jurisprudence contributes to law reform by advocating for changes based on empirical studies of law's social effects. It emphasizes adapting laws to meet societal needs and solving social problems through legal mechanisms.
30. How do different schools of jurisprudence approach the concept of justice?
Natural Law sees justice as adherence to universal moral principles. Legal Positivism separates justice from law's validity. Legal Realism views justice as what judges decide in practice. Sociological Jurisprudence considers justice in terms of social utility and fairness.
31. What is the role of custom in different schools of jurisprudence?
Natural Law may see custom as a reflection of innate moral principles. Legal Positivism recognizes custom as law only if incorporated into the legal system. Legal Realism and Sociological Jurisprudence emphasize the importance of custom in shaping legal practices and social norms.
32. What is the "core and penumbra" theory in H.L.A. Hart's version of Legal Positivism?
Hart's "core and penumbra" theory suggests that legal rules have a core of settled meaning and a penumbra of uncertainty. In clear cases (core), rules can be applied straightforwardly, but in borderline cases (penumbra), judges must exercise discretion.
33. How does Legal Realism challenge the idea of legal certainty?
Legal Realism challenges legal certainty by arguing that judicial decisions are influenced by various extra-legal factors, making outcomes less predictable. It emphasizes that law in books often differs from law in action.
34. How do different schools of jurisprudence view the relationship between law and morality?
Natural Law sees law and morality as inherently connected. Legal Positivism separates law from morality. Legal Realism focuses on how moral views influence legal decisions in practice. Sociological Jurisprudence considers how law can promote social morality.
35. How does Legal Realism view the role of precedent in judicial decision-making?
Legal Realism argues that precedent plays a less determinative role in judicial decision-making than traditionally assumed. It suggests that judges often use precedent selectively to justify decisions made on other grounds.
36. What is the concept of "social engineering" in Sociological Jurisprudence?
Social engineering in Sociological Jurisprudence refers to the use of law as a tool to shape society and solve social problems. It emphasizes the proactive role of law in guiding social change and addressing societal needs.
37. How do different schools of jurisprudence approach the concept of legal rights?
Natural Law sees rights as inherent and universal. Legal Positivism views rights as created by legal systems. Legal Realism focuses on how rights are actually protected in practice. Sociological Jurisprudence considers rights in terms of their social function and impact.
38. What is the "command theory of law" and which school of jurisprudence is it associated with?
The command theory of law, associated with Legal Positivism, particularly John Austin's work, defines law as commands issued by a sovereign and backed by sanctions. This theory emphasizes the authoritative nature of law rather than its moral content.
39. How does Natural Law theory explain the concept of "higher law"?
Natural Law theory posits the existence of a "higher law" - universal moral principles that transcend human-made laws. This higher law is seen as the ultimate standard against which positive laws should be judged and to which they should conform.
40. What is the "rule skepticism" of Legal Realism?
Rule skepticism in Legal Realism questions the determinative role of legal rules in judicial decision-making. It argues that judges often decide cases based on personal, political, or social factors and then use legal rules to justify their decisions after the fact.
41. How does Sociological Jurisprudence approach the study of legal institutions?
Sociological Jurisprudence studies legal institutions as social phenomena, examining their functions, impacts, and interactions with other social institutions. It emphasizes empirical research to understand how legal institutions operate in practice and affect society.
42. What is the concept of "legal positivism's separation thesis" and how does it differ from natural law theory?
Legal positivism's separation thesis argues that law and morality are distinct and separable. This contrasts with natural law theory, which asserts an inherent connection between law and morality, viewing unjust laws as not truly law.
43. How do different schools of jurisprudence view the role of judges in the legal system?
Natural Law sees judges as interpreters of moral principles. Legal Positivism views judges as appliers of established rules. Legal Realism emphasizes judges' personal factors in decision-making. Sociological Jurisprudence sees judges as social engineers balancing interests.
44. What is the "open texture of law" concept in H.L.A. Hart's Legal Positivism?
Hart's "open texture of law" refers to the inherent vagueness in legal language, allowing for judicial discretion in interpreting and applying laws to new situations. This concept acknowledges that not all legal questions have pre-determined answers.
45. How does Legal Realism challenge the traditional view of legal reasoning?
Legal Realism challenges the idea that legal reasoning is a purely logical process. It argues that judicial decisions are influenced by various non-legal factors, including personal beliefs, social context, and desired outcomes.
46. How do different schools of jurisprudence approach the concept of legal obligation?
Natural Law bases legal obligation on moral duty. Legal Positivism sees it as stemming from the law's authority. Legal Realism focuses on practical consequences of compliance. Sociological Jurisprudence considers social norms and pressures in creating legal obligations.
47. What is the "is-ought" problem in jurisprudence and how do different schools address it?
The "is-ought" problem questions deriving normative statements from descriptive ones. Natural Law attempts to bridge this gap, while Legal Positivism maintains a strict separation. Legal Realism and Sociological Jurisprudence focus more on practical effects than theoretical distinctions.
48. What is the "predictive theory of law" in Legal Realism and how does it challenge traditional views?
The predictive theory of law, associated with Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr., defines law as predictions of what courts will do. This challenges the view of law as a set of fixed rules, emphasizing instead its practical operation and judicial behavior.
49. How does Sociological Jurisprudence view the relationship between law and social change?
Sociological Jurisprudence sees law both as a product of social change and a tool for effecting it. It emphasizes the dynamic interaction between legal institutions and society, advocating for law reform to address changing social needs and conditions.
50. What is the concept of "natural law constitutionalism" and how does it relate to jurisprudence?
Natural law constitutionalism argues that constitutional interpretation should be guided by universal moral principles. This approach, rooted in Natural Law theory, contrasts with positivist approaches that focus solely on the text and original intent of constitutions.
51. How do different schools of jurisprudence approach the concept of legal interpretation?
Natural Law emphasizes interpreting laws in line with moral principles. Legal Positivism focuses on textual meaning and legislative intent. Legal Realism considers practical outcomes and judicial attitudes. Sociological Jurisprudence emphasizes social context and effects.
52. What is the "internal point of view" in H.L.A. Hart's Legal Positivism?
Hart's "internal point of view" refers to the perspective of participants in a legal system who accept and use its rules as guides for conduct. This concept helps explain how law creates obligations and differs from mere habits or threats.
53. How does Legal Realism view the role of social sciences in legal studies?
Legal Realism strongly advocates for incorporating social sciences into legal studies. It argues that understanding law requires examining its actual effects and the social factors influencing legal decisions, necessitating empirical research and interdisciplinary approaches.
54. What is the concept of "responsive law" in Sociological Jurisprudence?
Responsive law, a concept in Sociological Jurisprudence, refers to legal systems that are flexible and adaptable to changing social needs. It emphasizes law's role in addressing societal problems and balancing various interests rather than rigidly applying fixed rules.
55. How do different schools of jurisprudence contribute to our understanding of the nature and function of law in society?
Each school offers unique insights: Natural Law emphasizes moral foundations, Legal Positivism clarifies law's formal structure, Legal Realism reveals law's practical operation, and Sociological Jurisprudence highlights law's social context and effects. Together, they provide a comprehensive view of law's complex nature and diverse functions in society.

Articles

Back to top