What is Legal Interactionism?
In Part One, I developed a pluralist framework that allows us to understand why competing theories in jurisprudence may all embody a partial truth. It depends on the context and the issue studied which specific theory is most adequate. After this analytical groundwork, we are now in a position to construct a general theory of law and morality: a general theory – not a universal one. I cannot claim that it is universally valid; it can only be adequate in some contexts.1