ABSTRACT
The question calls for an outline of the general doctrine associated with legal positivism and provides an opportunity for criticism. The background to the doctrine, associated with the empiricism of Hume and Comte, should be mentioned. Hart’s enumeration of the various uses of the term ‘positivism’ ought to be explained. Account should be taken of the objection to legal positivism stemming from the belief that it downgrades the significance of ‘right’ and ‘justice’ in relation to the law. The following skeleton plan is presented:
Introduction – legal positivism as a mode of legal analysis – philosophical and logical positivism – Hume and Comte – Hart’s analysis of the use of the term ‘positivism’ – methodology of the legal positivists – criticisms of the doctrine – conclusion, legal positivism considered as having advanced from its early preoccupations with the ‘naturalistic fallacy’.
