ABSTRACT
Imperialism is the attempt to find and demonstrate the truth of a single methodological approach to understanding law. Any theory which does not adopt the method claimed to be the proper one is inadequate. The difference view maintains that theories should be distinguished and understood in light of their avowed purposes, such that theories of different types cannot be viewed as competitive if their principal aims are fundamentally different. This chapter argues that the difference view provides an insightful but insufficient step towards the best way to understand diversity among theories of law. A commitment to continuity emphasizes the value of seeking to understand and pursue relations between diverse approaches to understanding law. The success of continuity lies in recognition that diverse approaches can be connected by both complementary and conflicting relations. It is on this last ground that the meta-theoretical commitment of continuity presents both a more promising alternative than imperialism and a necessary modification to the difference view.
