What Is The Conceptual Frameworks Of Both Philosophical...

In philosophical jurisprudence, legal positivism has made a niche for itself in defining itself in opposition to a somewhat straight-laced reading of natural law theory. Often the comparison is based solely on an exceedingly strong and doctrinal interpretation of the two competing models. In this paper I will examine and distinguish the conceptual frameworks of both philosophical positions, detailing the â€Å"strong† and â€Å"weak† theses of natural law ; while in turn also examining the implications of â€Å"hard† and â€Å"soft† legal positivism. The finer distinctions between these more tailored or qualified theses need to be recognized in order to provoke a better understanding of the disagreement from a conceptual perspective. Natural Law – â€Å"Lex†¦show more content†¦In an ancient, modern, and contemporary context, natural law has been identified in not only with morality but also with the human ability to employ reason and to identify principles of rational conduct. Rational conduct, by ancient thinkers was more often identified by what is â€Å"Good† (be that in terms of divine eternal truths, or empirical notions of naturalistic perfection or completion) whereas more modern variant of natural law may identify a rational principle based on other considerations such as not only what is good, but what right, just, fair, reasonable or practical. Mark Murphy credits Thomas Aquinas with the natural law maxim â€Å"necessarily, law is a rational standard for conduct† (i.e. the strong thesis – hard necessity). He argues that natural law is often falsely recognized to be synonymous with a Latin maxim commonly associate with Cicero, St. Augustine, or Thomas Aquinas is ‘lex iniusta non est lex’, or ‘unjust law is not law’. Subscribing to this maxim would be a preposterous and gross interpretation of mainstream Thomist natural law. Although this phrase may provoke reflection upon whether unjust laws ought to be considered valid, or truly law; this is just an oversimplified version of the logical principle of non-contradiction and often incorrectly attributed to natural law, in the form of a straw man. There are obviously unjust laws that were spotted throughout present time, country, and history. These laws may undoubtedly be considered as