Encyclopedia of the Philosophy of Law and Social Philosophy

Living Edition
| Editors: Mortimer Sellers, Stephan Kirste

Austin, John

Living reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-6730-0_583-1

Introduction

John Austin (1790–1859), an English legal theorist, is considered by many to be the creator of the school of analytical jurisprudence, as well as, more specifically, the approach to law known as “legal positivism.” Austin’s particular command theory of law has been subject to pervasive criticisms, but it still has its attractions, in part due to its simple model of law, and in part due to how the model’s seeming emphasis on power and authority connects it with modern cynical or worldly (“realistic”) perspectives.

Overview

Austin’s theorizing about law was novel at four different levels of generality. First, he was arguably the first writer to approach the theory of law analytically (as contrasted with approaches to law more grounded in history or sociology, or arguments about law that were secondary to more general moral and political theories).

Second, Austin’s work should be seen against a background where most English judges and commentators saw common-law reasoning...

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Austin J (1879) Lectures on jurisprudence, or the philosophy of positive law, 4th edn, rev. (ed Campbell R), 2 vols. John Murray, London [reprint, Bristol: Thoemmes Press, Bristol, 2002]Google Scholar
  2. Austin J (1995) The province of jurisprudence determined (ed Rumble W). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge [1832]Google Scholar
  3. Cotterrell R (2003) The politics of jurisprudence, 2nd edn. LexisNexis, LondonGoogle Scholar
  4. Freeman M, Mindus P (eds) (2013) The legacy of John Austin’s jurisprudence. Springer, DordrechtGoogle Scholar
  5. Harris JW (1977) The concept of Sovereign will, Acta Juridica (Essays in honour of Ben Beinart, vol II). Juta & Co., Cape Town, 1979, pp 1–15Google Scholar
  6. Hart HLA (1954) Introduction. In: Hart HLA (ed), John Austin, The province of jurisprudence determined. Weidenfeld & Nicolson, London, pp vii–xxiGoogle Scholar
  7. Hart HLA (1958) Positivism and the separation of law and morals. Harv Law Rev 71:593–629CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Hobbes T (1996) Leviathan (ed Tuck R). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. [1651]Google Scholar
  9. Hume D (2000) A treatise of human nature (eds Norton DF, Norton MJ). Oxford University Press, Oxford. [1739]Google Scholar
  10. Kelsen H (1941) The pure theory of law and analytical jurisprudence. Harv Law Rev 55:44–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Lobban M (1991) The common law and English jurisprudence 1760–1850. Clarendon Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  12. Stein P (1988) The character and influence of the Roman civil law. The Hambledon Press, LondonGoogle Scholar
  13. von Savigny FK (1975) On the vocation of our age for legislation and jurisprudence (trans. Hayward A). Arno Press, New York. [1814]Google Scholar

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Law and PhilosophyUniversity of MinnesotaMinneapolisUSA

Section editors and affiliations

  • Gianfrancesco Zanetti
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of LawUniversità degli Studi di Modena e Reggio EmiliaModenaItaly