What is natural law versus philosophical positivism
Philosophy of law is a complex and in-depth study, requiring intimate knowledge of the legal process in general as well as a philosophical mind. For centuries, the scope and nature of law has been the subject of debate and controversy from various perspectives, and an intense intellectual debate has arisen around the fundamental question "what is law". In response, several major schools of thought were born, of which natural law scholars and positivists were most notable. These two camps have diametrically opposed views on the role and function of law in certain circumstances, and in themselves have provided platforms for criticism and debate that are still relevant today.
Although classifications of natural law and positivism are frequently used, it is important to remember that they cover a very wide range of academic opinions. Even within each camp, there are those who lean toward more liberal or more conservative understandings, and there is of course also a gray area. Having said that, academics and philosophers can be surrounded by a class on the basis of some basic principles in their writings and opinions.
Natural law has long been associated with extreme humanistic considerations, i.e. determining the spiritual or moral influence of their understanding of the way the law works. One of the basic principles is that an immoral law cannot be a law at all, on the grounds that government needs moral authority to be able to legislate. For this reason, natural law theories have been used to justify ground-level chaos and disorder. This led to widespread criticism of the principles of natural law, which had to be refined and developed to fit modern thinking. On the flip side, natural law has been used as the ultimate way to serve “justice” to war criminals and former dictators after their rule.
At its core is positivism, the belief that law is unaffected by morality, but is essentially the source of moral considerations. Because morality is a subjective concept, positivism suggests that law is the source of morality, and that extralegal considerations should not be taken into account. Positivism has been criticized for allowing extremism and unjust acts through law. It has also been suggested that positivism in its strict sense is flawed because it ignores the depth and breadth of language in legal legislation, which means that positivism can be read in different lights based on the different meanings of the same word. Despite this, positivism is seen as one of the fundamental legal theories in the development of modern legal philosophy over the past few decades, and is gaining broad support through a contemporary academic revival.
Natural law and positivism have been the subject of ongoing academic debate about the nature of law and its role in society. Each of the legal schools involved has been critiqued and built on one and the other theories and principles to create a more complex philosophical understanding of legal structure. Although the debate is set to continue with a new generation of promising legal theorists, both natural law and positivism have gained widespread respect for their consistency and careful analyzes of the structure of law.