Introduction to Jurisprudence

The history of the concept of law reveals that jurisprudence had its evolutionary beginning
from the classical Greek period to 21st-century modern jurisprudence with numerous changes
in its nature in various stages of its evolution. Jurisprudence is a concept to bring theory and
life into focus. It deals with the fundamental principles on which rests the superstructure of
law. The concept of jurisprudence basically helps in cultivating one’s own ideas in relation to
a particular theory. In abstract jurisprudence is a subject whose knowledge is the basis and the
foundation of the whole legal studies. Jurisprudence is a name given to a certain type of
investigation into law, where we are concerned to reflect on the nature of legal rules and on
the underlying meaning of legal concepts and on the essential features of the legal system.
Jurisprudence is both an intellectual and idealistic abstraction as well as a behavioural study
of man in society. In jurisprudence, we ask what it is for a rule to be a legal rule and what
distinguishes law from morality, etiquette and other related phenomena.
What is Jurisprudence?
There is no universal or uniform definition of Jurisprudence since people have different
ideologies and notions throughout the world. It is a very vast subject.
When an author talks about political conditions of his society, it reflects that condition of law
prevailing at that time in that particular society. It is believed that Romans were the first who
started to study what is law.
Meaning
The term jurisprudence has been derived from the Latin word ‘jurisprudentia’ which means
‘skill or knowledge of law’.
In the early decades of the 19th century with the theories propounded by Bentham and Austin,
the term ‘jurisprudence’ acquired a definite meaning.
Bentham is known as Father of Jurisprudence was the first one to analyze what is law. He
divided his study into two parts:
1. Examination of Law ‘as it is’ i.e. Expositorial Approach– Command of Sovereign.
2. Examination of Law ‘as it ought to be’ i.e. Censorial Approach– Morality of Law.
However, Austin concerned himself mainly with the formal analysis of the English law and
its related concept, which still continues to be the basic concept. Austin’s ideology that ‘law
is the command of the sovereign’ became the structure of English Legal System, which
remained with the formal analysis of law as ‘it is’ (Expositorial) and never became ‘as it
ought to be’ (Censorial).
Definitions by:
1. Austin
2. Holland
3. Salmond
4. Keeton
5. Pound
6. Dias and Hughes
7. Ulpain
Juristic approach
Ulpian – The Roman jurist defined jurisprudence as the observation of things, human and
divine, the knowledge of the just and the unjust.
Austin– He calls jurisprudence as the ‘philosophy of positive law’. The term ‘positive law’
connotes ‘jus positivum’ which means law lay down by a political superior for commanding
obedience from his subjects. He preferred to divide his concept into two parts:
1. General Jurisprudence– It includes such subjects or ends of law as are common to
all system.
2. Particular Jurisprudence– It is the science of any actual system of law or any
portion of it.
Basically, in essence, they are the same but in scope they are different.
Salmond’s Criticism of Austin
He said that for a concept to fall into the category of ‘General Jurisprudence’, it should be
common in various systems of law. This is not always true as there could be concepts that fall
in neither of the two categories.
Holland’s Criticism of Austin
He said that it is only the material which is particular and not the science itself.
Holland’s Definition– Jurisprudence means the ‘formal science of positive laws’. It is an
analytical science rather than a material science.
1. He defined the term positive law. He said that Positive Law means the general rule
of external human action enforced by a sovereign political authority.
2. We can see that, he simply added the word ‘formal’ in Austin’s definition. Formal
here means that we study only the form and not the essence. We study only the
external features and do not go into the intricacies of the subject. According to him,
 how a positive law is applied and how it is particular is not the concern of
Jurisprudence.
3. The reason for using the word ‘Formal Science’ is that it describes only the form or
the external sight of the subject and not its internal contents. According to Holland,
Jurisprudence is not concerned with the actual material contents of law but only with
its fundamental conceptions. Therefore, Jurisprudence is a Formal Science.
4. This definition has been criticized by Gray and Dr Jenks. According to them,
Jurisprudence is a formal science because it is concerned with the form, conditions,
social life, human relations that have grown up in the society and to which society
attaches legal significance.
5. Holland said that Jurisprudence is a science because it is a systematized and
properly co-ordinate knowledge of the subject of intellectual inquiry. The term
positive law confines the inquiry to these social relations which are regulated by the
rules imposed by the States and enforced by the Courts of law. Therefore, it is a
formal science of positive law.
Salmond– He said that Jurisprudence is Science of Law. By law, he meant law of the land
or civil law. He divided Jurisprudence into two parts:
1. Generic– This includes the entire body of legal doctrines.
2. Specific– This deals with the particular department or any portion of the doctrines.
‘Specific’ is further divided into three parts:
1. Analytical, Expository or Systematic– it deals with the contents of an actual legal
system existing at any time, past or the present.
2. Legal History– it is concerned with the legal system in its process of historical
development.
3. The science of Legislation- the purpose of it is to set forth law as it ought to be. It
deals with the ideal future of the legal system and the purpose which it may serve.
Criticism of Salmond– Critics says that it is not an accurate definition. Salmond only gave
the structure and failed to provide any clarity of thought.
Keeton- according to him “jurisprudence is the study and scientific synthesis of the essential
principle of law.” The definition seeks to explain the distinction between public and private
law.
Roscoe Pound– He described Jurisprudence as “the science of law using the
term ‘law’ in the juridical sense as denoting the body of principles recognized or enforced
by public and regular tribunals in the Administration of Justice.”
Dias and Hughes– They believed Jurisprudence as any thought or writing about law
rather than a technical exposition of a branch of law itself.
Scope of Jurisprudence
The scope of jurisprudence has widened considerably over the years. Commenting on the
scope of jurisprudence Justice [Link] observed, “Jurisprudence is both an
intellectual and idealistic abstraction as well as the behavioural study of man in society. It
includes political, social, economic and cultural ideas. It covers the study of man in relation
to society.” This makes the distinction between law and jurisprudence amply clear. It,
therefore, follows that jurisprudence comprises the philosophy of law and its object is not to
discover new rules but to reflect on the rules already known.
Whereas, Austin was the only one who tried to limit the scope of jurisprudence. He tried to
segregate morals and theology from the study of jurisprudence.
Approaches to the study of Jurisprudence
There are two ways to study it-
1. Empirical– Facts to Generalization.
2. A Priori– Start with Generalization in light of which the facts are examined.
Significance and Utility of the Study of Jurisprudence
1. This subject has its own intrinsic interest and value because this is a subject of serious
scholarship and research; researchers in Jurisprudence contribute to the development
of society by having repercussions in the whole legal, political and social school of
thoughts. One of the tasks of this subject is to construct and elucidate concepts
serving to render the complexities of law more manageable and more rational. It is the
belief of this subject that the theory can help to improve practice.
2. Jurisprudence also has an educational value. It helps in the logical analysis of the
legal concepts and it sharpens the logical techniques of the lawyer. The study of
jurisprudence helps to combat the lawyer’s occupational view of formalism which
leads to excessive concentration on legal rules for their own sake and disregard of the
social function of the law.
3. The study of jurisprudence helps to put the law in its proper context by considering
the needs of the society and by taking note of the advances in related and relevant
disciplines.
4. Jurisprudence can teach the people to look if not forward, at least sideways and
around them and realize that answers to a new legal problem must be found by a
consideration of present social needs and not in the wisdom of the past.
5. Jurisprudence is the eye of law and the grammar of law because it throws light on
basic ideas and fundamental principles of law. Therefore, by understanding the nature
of law, its concepts and distinctions, a lawyer can find out the actual rule of law. It
also helps in knowing the language, grammar, the basis of treatment and assumptions
 upon which the subject rests. Therefore, some logical training is necessary for a
lawyer which he can find from the study of Jurisprudence.
It trains the critical faculties of the mind of the students so that they can dictate
fallacies and use accurate legal terminology and expression.
6. It helps a lawyer in his practical work. A lawyer always has to tackle new problems
every day. This he can handle through his knowledge of Jurisprudence which trains
his mind to find alternative legal channels of thought.
7. Jurisprudence helps the judges and lawyers in ascertaining the true meaning of the
laws passed by the legislators by providing the rules of interpretation. Therefore, the
study of jurisprudence should not be confined to the study of positive laws but also
must include normative study i.e. that study should deal with the improvement of
law in the context of prevailing socio-economic and political philosophies of time,
place and circumstances.
8. Professor Dias said that “the study of jurisprudence is an opportunity for the lawyer
to bring theory and life into focus, for it concerns human thought in relation to social
existence.”
Jurisprudence is Lawyer’s extraversion
In the words of Julius Stone, the study of jurisprudence should be integrative, synthetic and
purposive while concentrating towards the need of humanistic justice. He firmly believed that
jurisprudence is lawyer’s extraversion as it is the lawyer’s examination of precepts and
techniques of the law in the light derived from present knowledge in disciplines other than
law.
A lawyer should not be a mere legal technician knowing legal texts and procedure but, he
should be a social activist. The ‘extra-legal version’ approach to as an instrument of social
change and reforms has found favour with the judges of the Supreme Court, notably Justice
[Link], Justice [Link], Justice Chagla, Justice [Link], and
others.
Adopting a pragmatic to the application of law, Justice [Link] in Vishnu Agencies
(P) Ltd. v. C.T.O.[AIR 1978 SC 449] observed that “legal fraternity should not construe the
provisions of the constitution in a narrow and pedantic sense, instead a broad and liberal spirit
should inspire those whose duty is to interpret the law. A constitution is a living and organic
thing which of all instruments has the greatest claim to be construed ‘ut res magis valeat
quam pereat’ (it is better for a thing to have effect than to be made void)- the lawyers
and judges ought to extend the constitutional provisions for elimination of poverty, social
inequalities, and economic injustices.”
Mr Justice Krishna Iyer, a former judge of the Supreme Court, expounded the philosophy of
jurisprudence as a lawyer’s extraversion. [(Rohtas Industries v. Its Staff Union, AIR 1976
SC 425); (Indian Express Newspapers (P) Ltd. v. Its Workers Union, AIR 1979 SC 137);
(Som Prakash Rakhe v. UOI AIR 1981 SC 212), and other cases] He firmly believed that
“the problem of law is, at bottom, projections of life…. The root of jurisprudence lies in the
soil of society’s urges and the bloom in the nourishment from the humanity services.”
Relationship of Jurisprudence with other Social Sciences
Jurisprudence is closely inter-related with other social sciences since all of them are
concerned with human behaviour in society.
[Link] “observed modern jurisprudence trenches on the field of social science and of
philosophy; it digs into the historical past and attempts to create symmetry of a garden out of
the luxuriant chaos of conflicting legal system.”
Dean Roscoe Pound who propounded the theory of law as a ‘social engineering’ pointed out
that jurisprudence is closely inter-linked with ethics, economics, politics, and sociology
which though distinct enough as the core, are shade into each other. All other social sciences
must co-ordinate with jurisprudence to make it a functional branch of knowledge.
Sociology and Jurisprudence
This branch is based on social theories. It is essentially concerned with the influence of law
on the society at large particularly when we talk about social welfare. [Link] gave 3
obvious reasons as a relation between law and sociology:

 It enables a better understanding of the evolution and development of law;

 It provides great substream for an identity of law commensurate with human needs
and social interests;

 and provides objectivity to legal interpretation which is need of the hour.

Jurisprudence and Psychology
No human science can be described properly without a thorough knowledge of Human Mind.
Hence, Psychology has a close connection with Jurisprudence. Relationship of Psychology
and Law is established in the branch of Criminological Jurisprudence. Both psychology
and jurisprudence are interested in solving questions such as motive behind a crime, criminal
personality, reasons for crime etc.
Jurisprudence and Ethics
Ethics has been defined as the science of Human Conduct. It strives for ideal Human
Behavior. This is how Ethics and Jurisprudence are interconnected:
a. Ideal Moral Code– This could be found in relation to Natural Law.
b. Positive Moral Code– This could be found in relation to Law as the Command of the
Sovereign.
c. Ethics is concerned with good human conduct in the light of public opinion.
d. Jurisprudence is related with Positive Morality in so far as the law is the instrument to
assert positive ethics.
 e. Jurisprudence believes that Legislations must be based on ethical principles. It is not
to be divorced from Human principles.
f. Ethics believes that No law is good unless it is based on sound principles of human
value.
A Jurist should be adept in this science because unless he studies ethics, he won’t be able to
criticize the law. However, Austin disagreed with this relationship.
Jurisprudence and Economics
Economics studies man’s efforts in satisfying his wants and producing and distributing
wealth. Both Jurisprudence and Economics are sciences and both aim to regulate the lives of
the people. Both of them try to develop the society and improve the life of an individual. Karl
Marx was a pioneer in this regard.
Jurisprudence and History
History studies past events. Development of Law for the administration of justice becomes
sound if we know the history and background of legislation and the way law has evolved.
The branch is known as Historical Jurisprudence.
Jurisprudence and Politics
In a politically organized society, there are regulations and laws which lay down
authoritatively what a man may and may not do. Thus, there is a deep connection between
politics and Jurisprudence.
Nature and Scope of Jurisprudence

What is Jurisprudence?
There is no universal or uniform definition of Jurisprudence since people have different
ideologies and notions throughout the world. It is a very vast subject.
When an author talks about political conditions of his society, it reflects that condition of law
prevailing at that time in that particular society. It is believed that Romans were the first who
started to study what is law.
Jurisprudence- Latin word ‘Jurisprudentia’- Knowledge of Law or Skill in Law.
-Most of our law has been taken from Common Law System.
-Bentham is known as Father of Jurisprudence. Austin took his work further.

Bentham was the first one to analyse what is law. He divided his study into two parts:
1. Examination of Law as it is- Expositorial Approach- Command of Sovereign.
2. Examination of Law as it ought to be- Censorial Approach- Morality of Law.
However, Austin stuck to the idea that law is command of sovereign. The structure of
English Legal System remained with the formal analysis of law (Expositorial) and never
became what it ought to be (Censorial).
J. Stone also tried to define Jurisprudence. He said that it is a lawyer’s extraversion. He
further said that it is a lawyer’s examination of the percept, ideas and techniques of law in the
light derived from present knowledge in disciplines other than the law.
Thus, we see that there can be no goodness or badness in law. Law is made by the State so
there could be nothing good or bad about it. Jurisprudence is nothing but the science of law.
Definitions by:
1. Austin
2. Holland
3. Salmond
4. Keeton
5. Pound
6. Dias and Hughes
Austin- He said that “Science of Jurisprudence is concerned with Positive Laws that is laws
strictly so called. It has nothing to do with the goodness or badness of law.
This has two aspects attached to it:
1. General Jurisprudence- It includes such subjects or ends of law as are common to all
system.
2. Particular Jurisprudence- It is the science of any actual system of law or any portion of
it.
Basically, in essence they are same but in scope they are different.

Salmond’s Criticism of Austin

He said that for a concept to fall within the category of ‘General Jurisprudence’, it should be
common in various systems of law. This is not always true as there could be concepts that fall
in neither of the two categories.
Holland’s Criticism of Austin
He said that it is only the material which is particular and not the science itself.
Holland’s Definition- Jurisprudence means the formal science of positive laws. It is an
analytical science rather than a material science.
1. He defined the term positive law. He said that Positive Law means the general rule of
external human action enforced by a sovereign political authority.

2. We can see that, he simply added the word ‘formal’ in Austin’s definition. Formal here
means that we study only the form and not the essence. We study only the external features
and do not go into the intricacies of the subject. According to him, how positive law is
applied and how it is particular is not the concern of Jurisprudence.
3. The word ‘Formal Science’ is used because it describes only the form or the external sight
of the subject and not its internal contents. According to Holland, Jurisprudence is not
concerned with the actual material contents of law but only with its fundamental
conceptions. Therefore, Jurisprudence is a Formal Science.

4. This definition has been criticized by Gray and Dr. Jenks. According to them,
Jurisprudence is a formal science because it is concerned with the form, conditions, social
life, human relations that have grown up in the society and to which society attaches legal
significance.

5. Holland said that Jurisprudence is a science because it is a systematized and properly co-
ordinated knowledge of the subject of intellectual enquiry. The term positive law confines
the enquiry to these social relations which are regulated by the rules imposed by the States
and enforced by the Courts of law. Therefore, it is a formal science of positive law.

6. Formal as a prefix indicates that the science deals only with the purposes, methods and
ideas on the basis of the legal system as distinct from material science which deals only with
the concrete details of law.
7. This definition has been criticized on the ground that this definition is concerned only with
the form and not the intricacies.
Salmond- He said that Jurisprudence is Science of Law. By law he meant law of the land
or civil law. He divided Jurisprudence into two parts:
1. Generic- This includes the entire body of legal doctrines.
2. Specific- This deals with the particular department or any portion of the doctrines.

‘Specific’ is further divided into three parts:

1. Analytical, Expository or Systematic- It deals with the contents of an actual legal system
existing at any time, past or the present.
2. Historical- It is concerned with the legal history and its development
3. Ethical- According to him, the purpose of any legislation is to set forth laws as it ought to
be. It deals with the ‘ideal’ of the legal system and the purpose for which it exists.

Criticism of Salmond- Critics say that it is not an accurate definition. Salmond only gave the
structure and failed to provide any clarity of thought.
Keeton- He considered Jurisprudence as the study and systematic arrangement of the
general principles of law. According to him, Jurisprudence deals with the distinction
between Public and Private Laws and considers the contents of principle departments of law.
Roscoe Pound- He described Jurisprudence as the science of law using the
term ‘law’ in the juridical sense as denoting the body of principles recognized or enforced
by public and regular tribunals in the Administration of Justice.
Dias and Hughes- They believed Jurisprudence as any thought or writing about law
rather than a technical exposition of a branch of law itself.
Conclusion- Thus, we can safely say that Jurisprudence is the study of fundamental legal
principles.
Scope of Jurisprudence- After reading all the above mentioned definitions, we would find
that Austin was the only one who tried to limit the scope of jurisprudence. He tried to
segregate morals and theology from the study of jurisprudence.

However, the study of jurisprudence cannot be circumscribed because it includes all human
conduct in the State and the Society.

Approaches to the study of Jurisprudence- There are two ways

1. Empirical- Facts to Generalization.
2. A Priori- Start with Generalization in light of which the facts are examined.
Significance and Utility of the Study of Jurisprudence
1. This subject has its own intrinsic interest and value because this is a subject of serious
scholarship and research; researchers in Jurisprudence contribute to the development of
society by having repercussions in the whole legal, political and social school of thoughts.
One of the tasks of this subject is to construct and elucidate concepts serving to render the
complexities of law more manageable and more rational. It is the belief of this subject that
the theory can help to improve practice.
2. Jurisprudence also has an educational value. It helps in the logical analysis of the legal
concepts and it sharpens the logical techniques of the lawyer. The study of jurisprudence
helps to combat the lawyer’s occupational view of formalism which leads to excessive
concentration on legal rules for their own sake and disregard of the social function of the law.
3. The study of jurisprudence helps to put law in its proper context by considering the needs
of the society and by taking note of the advances in related and relevant disciplines.
4. Jurisprudence can teach the people to look if not forward, at least sideways and around
them and realize that answers to a new legal problem must be found by a consideration of
present social needs and not in the wisdom of the past.
5. Jurisprudence is the eye of law and the grammar of law because it throws light on basic
ideas and fundamental principles of law. Therefore, by understanding the nature of law, its
concepts and distinctions, a lawyer can find out the actual rule of law. It also helps in
knowing the language, grammar, the basis of treatment and assumptions upon which the
subject rests. Therefore, some logical training is necessary for a lawyer which he can find
from the study of Jurisprudence.
6. It trains the critical faculties of the mind of the students so that they can dictate fallacies
and use accurate legal terminology and expression.
7. It helps a lawyer in his practical work. A lawyer always has to tackle new problems every
day. This he can handle through his knowledge of Jurisprudence which trains his mind to find
alternative legal channels of thought.
8. Jurisprudence helps the judges and lawyers in ascertaining the true meaning of the laws
passed by the legislators by providing the rules of interpretation. Therefore, the study of
jurisprudence should not be confined to the study of positive laws but also must include
normative study i.e. that study should deal with the improvement of law in the context of
prevailing socio-economic and political philosophies of time, place and circumstances.

9. Professor Dias said that ‘the study of jurisprudence is an opportunity for the lawyer to
bring theory and life into focus, for it concerns human thought in relation to social
existence’.
Relationship of Jurisprudence with other Social Sciences
1. Sociology and Jurisprudence- There is a branch called as Sociological Jurisprudence.
This branch is based on social theories. It is essentially concerned with the influence of law
on the society at large particularly when we talk about social welfare. The approach from
sociological perspective towards law is different from a lawyer’s perspective. The study of
sociology has helped Jurisprudence in its approach. Behind all legal aspects, there is always
something social. However, Sociology of Law is different from Sociological Jurisprudence.

2. Jurisprudence and Psychology- No human science can be described properly without a

thorough knowledge of Human Mind. Hence, Psychology has a close connection with
Jurisprudence. Relationship of Psychology and Law is established in the branch
of Criminological Jurisprudence. Both psychology and jurisprudence are interested in
solving questions such as motive behind a crime, criminal personality, reasons for crime etc.

3. Jurisprudence and Ethics- Ethics has been defined as the science of Human Conduct. It
strives for ideal Human Behaviour. This is how Ethics and Jurisprudence are interconnected:
a. Ideal Moral Code- This could be found in relation to Natural Law.
b. Positive Moral Code- This could be found in relation to Law as the Command of
the Sovereign.
c. Ethics is concerned with good human conduct in the light of public opinion.
d. Jurisprudence is related with Positive Morality in so far as law is the instrument to
assert positive ethics.
e. Jurisprudence believes that Legislations must be based on ethical principles. It is
not to be divorced from Human principles.
f. Ethics believes that No law is good unless it is based on sound principles of human
value.
 g. A Jurist should be adept in this science because unless he studies ethics, he won’t
be able to criticize the law.
h. However, Austin disagreed with this relationship.
4. Jurisprudence and Economics- Economics studies man’s efforts in satisfying his wants
and producing and distributing wealth. Both Jurisprudence and Economics are sciences and
both aim to regulate lives of the people. Both of them try to develop the society and improve
life of an individual. Karl Marx was a pioneer in this regard.
5. Jurisprudence and History- History studies past events. Development of Law for
administration of justice becomes sound if we know the history and background of
legislations and the way law has evolved. The branch is known as Historical Jurisprudence.

6. Jurisprudence and Politics- In a politically organized society, there are regulations and
laws which lay down authoritatively what a man may and may not do. Thus, there is a deep
connected between politics and Jurisprudence.

GENERALITY/ GENERALISATION OF LAW

A characteristic feature of law is its generality. Legal rules ordinarily are cast in general form,
and reasoning within the law is constrained by a principle of generalization, according to
which the standards that one applies to a particular case must be applicable to other
situations.