Scandinavian realism emphasized empiricism and viewed law as a social phenomenon rather than a set of doctrinal or metaphysical concepts. Key figures included Axel Hagerstrom, who rejected objective values and viewed legal concepts as reflecting actual use, and Alf Ross, who saw legal norms as directives corresponding to social facts that guide judicial behavior when consistently followed. Ross believed validity referred to the predictability of a norm being applied, and that valid law provided an interpretive framework for how the legal system functions in practice based on shared social expectations.
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
0 ratings0% found this document useful (0 votes)
343 views9 pages
Scandinavian Realism
Scandinavian realism emphasized empiricism and viewed law as a social phenomenon rather than a set of doctrinal or metaphysical concepts. Key figures included Axel Hagerstrom, who rejected objective values and viewed legal concepts as reflecting actual use, and Alf Ross, who saw legal norms as directives corresponding to social facts that guide judicial behavior when consistently followed. Ross believed validity referred to the predictability of a norm being applied, and that valid law provided an interpretive framework for how the legal system functions in practice based on shared social expectations.
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 9
Scandinavian Realism
Jurist in Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Finland and
Iceland gave lesser importance to judicial behaviour and psychology Yet shared a radical empiricist attitude towards law and life Ross – All metaphysics are a chimera, and there is no cognition other than empirical Law is a social reality, eschewed of doctrinal jurisprudential conceptions like morality, natural law, idealism and metaphysical notions of right / duty/ sovereignty etc. Axel Hagerstrom (1896-1939) Father of Scandinavian realist movement He rejects the idea of objective value and pleads instead for an examination of the actual use of legal concepts The mental attitude involved in the conception of law There is nothing like ‘goodness’ or ‘badness’ They are simply emotional attitudes of approval or disapproval Magical belief - Development of the primitive belief in the power of words to affect happenings in the world of fact - obligations Olivecrona Law concerns itself with the actions of men Law is a set of social facts They are in no sense will of state or command They are independent imperatives Issued from time to time by constitutional agencies They operate on the mind of the judge Bindingness in law comes from consent, withdraw consent it ceases to be valid Study of law should be taken up as a social fact – social investigation is necessary Alf Ross Legal notions must be interpreted as conceptions of social reality, the behaviour of man in society and as nothing else A norm is a directive which stands in relation of correspondence to social facts Norms are directives to courts Norm exists means such directives are followed in a majority of cases by people who feel bound to do so Norms of Law – ◦ Norms of conduct ◦ Norms of competence or procedure Validity is the degree of predictability that a norm will be applied The degree of probability depends on the material of experience on which the prediction is built that is the sources of law Where probability is high, the validity is high A valid law means an abstract set of normative ideas which serve as a scheme for interpretation for the phenomenon of law in action, which in turn means that the law is effectively followed because they are experienced and felt to be socially binding by the judge and other legal authorities applying the law On criticism that norms aren't only addressed to the courts Ross opined that from a psychological point of view they are addressed to individuals too Alf Ross ► The Game of Chess- Rules that tell you how the game must be played as opposed to strategy ► Why does one choose not to break these rules? Morality? If broken, we must presume that person breaking does not want to win by the rules, hence ulterior motive- money or fame ► Like cards for example ► Directives on the other hand, are to be decided based on each game and what the players feel they are bound by ► The norms of chess make it possible to understand the phenomenon of chess ► Same applies to law as well