ABSTRACT
Hart presents his approach to law as a superior alternative to previous attempts at explaining the nature of law – especially the Imperative Positivism of Bentham, Austin and Kelsen – which he believes have provided us only with narrow, singular and, therefore, inadequate definitions of the law. Hart argues that it is not possible to answer effectively the question ‘what is law?’ by appealing to a definition which merely emphasises some particular feature of the law, such as its coercive element or its moral dimension. Such an approach will only serve to obscure other, equally important elements of the law which we cannot afford to ignore if we are to present an adequate picture and explanation of the nature of law.
