Introduction.

Jurisprudence- Latin word ‘Jurisprudentia’- Knowledge of Law or Skill in Law. Most of our law has been
taken from Common Law System.

 Bentham is known as Father of Jurisprudence.

Attempts to define jurisprudence are made by jurists for whom the delineation of its proper subject matter
is seen as a fundamental task, and by teachers and students anxious to recognize, even in imprecise terms,
the general range and boundaries of their subject area. Linguists and jurists are aware of the problems
inherent in the technique of defining terms; students may be confronted, at an early stage of their quest, by
warnings as to the ‘misguided and misleading’ nature of the search for definitions1.

Our comments concerning the value of attempts to define will note the difficulties of the process, but will
stress the importance of the arguments of those who assume that the nature of jurisprudence is knowable
and amenable to precise description, or definition. We shall emphasize the value to be derived from
exploring those paths which might lead to an acceptable definition.

By definition,

we have in mind a precise enunciation of the principal characteristics of the defined object which will
allow it to be distinguished from other objects. It will mark out boundaries, or other limits, thus enabling us
to state with a high degree of accuracy that, for example, ‘a tort is ...’, ‘possession means ...’, ‘a contract
comes into existence when ...’. There are, however, basic problems involved in the process of defining ‘by
characteristics. Popper, the philosopher of scientific method, rejects in their entirety arguments for the
‘value’ of definitions; he sees these arguments as involving no more than ‘infinite regressions’, so that
controversies concerning the ‘correctness’ of a definition can lead only to empty discussions about words.
Consider, for example, the definition of ‘alienation’ as ‘an exercise of the power of disposing of or
transferring property’. Popper would dismiss this as, at best, mere tautology, or, at worst, a collection of
words which demand further elucidation. What is the meaning of ‘exercise’, ‘power’, ‘transferring’?
Consider, next, Holland’s apparently simple definition of ‘jurisprudence’ as ‘the formal science of positive
law’. The terms which make up the defining formula (‘formal’, ‘positive’, etc.) require, according to
Popper, further specific definition, with the result that an infinite regression seems likely to follow on any
definition based on a collection of terms2.

Definition of Jurisprudence According to Austin,

1
Nature and scope of jurisprudence, GGSIP UNIVERSITY DELHI-INDIA
2
Popper’s classic essay, ‘Two kinds of definitions

| [School]
MOHAMED ABUBAKAR
 Austin defines Jurisprudence as the "Philosophy of Positive Law”. Positive Law means the law laid down
by political superior to regulate the conduct of those subjects in his authority. The positive law is identical
to civil law. However, the term Philosophy is misleading. Philosophy is the theory of things, man and
divine, while Jurisprudence only deals with man-made law3.

Definition of Jurisprudence According to Salmond,

Salmond defines Jurisprudence as the "Science of the first principles of civil law”. In Salmond's point of
view, Jurisprudence thus deals with civil law or the law of the state. This kind of law consists of rules
applied by courts in the administration of justice. There are three kinds of laws that govern the conduct of
human in a society.

 Theologian Laws - derive their authority from a divine or superhuman source intended to regulate
human conduct as well as beliefs and are enforced by spiritual rewards or penalties in the
other world (ultra-mundane sanctions)
 Moralist Laws - Man-made that exist in all societies, both primitive and most civilized. There is no
definite authority to enforce the laws, but the public.
 Jurist Laws - Regulates external human conduct only and not inner beliefs. They can exist in
politically organized societies, which have a government. They are enforced by courts or judicial
tribunals of the society which applies a variety of sanctions ranging from fines to capital
punishments. According to Salmond, Jurisprudence is the science of first principles of jurist law or
in Salmond's words civil law4.

The Meaning of Jurisprudence According to Vinogradoff in 1913,

Vinogradoff was then Professor of Jurisprudence at Oxford, voiced his objections to the use – or place – of
definition in the process of studying jurisprudence. His arguments continue to be in use today. Vinogradoff
argues that definitions given at the outset of a course of study may impose on students, who have only
vague ideas at this stage, patterns of thought which they tend to accept passively, largely because of the
dogmatic mode of assertion common to definitions. Definitions ought to emerge towards the end of a
course of study as a natural reaction to the conflict of ideas which characterizes jurisprudence. In our day,
Olivecrona has stated that it is impossible to start from a definition, since that would involve a petitio

3
Philosophy of positive law by Austin

4
Science of the first principles of civil law by Salmond,

| [School]
MOHAMED ABUBAKAR
 principii (the logical fallacy of ‘begging the question’). Before a definition can be reached, he states, the
constituents of a body of knowledge must be analyzed5.

Hart’s ‘Definition and Theory in Jurisprudence,

Raises a general predicament facing those who seek to define any terms in law. He follows the philosopher,
Wittgenstein, who states that ‘the meaning of a word is its use in the language’. We will understand the
meaning of terms such as ‘jurisprudence’, ‘motive’, ‘duty’, by considering the ways in which these terms
are put to use in the language. Hart suggests that the content of legal vocabulary can be clarified only by a
consideration of the conditions under which statements in which particular terms have their ‘characteristic
use’ are true. Consider, for example, the word ‘duty’, defined by some jurists as ‘an obligation under the
law, related to recognition of another’s rights. Hart would ask that the usage of the term be examined in
statements, such as: ‘Employers have a duty to carry out the provisions of the National Minimum Wage
Act 1998. ‘We have a duty to pay income tax’; ‘Society has a duty to help those who are unable to help
themselves.’ It becomes necessary, Hart argues, to examine the standard uses of the relevant expressions
and the way in which these depend on a social context, itself often left unstated. Hence, statements such as
‘Jurisprudence is an examination of the interface of legislation and communal activities’ or ‘Jurisprudence
seeks to lay bare the class nature of law and its practices’, require a careful examination of the precise
usage of the separate terms which make up these sentences6.

Definition of jurisprudence according to Wortley and Cross.

Wortley’s definition of jurisprudence as ‘the knowledge of law in its various forms and manifestations’?
When Cross defines jurisprudence as ‘the study of a lawyer’s fundamental assumptions’, what weight is to
be placed on the ambiguous adjective, The shifting nature of words, changes in their meanings and in
perception of their ‘significance’, make verbal analysis a difficult matter. Hence, it is argued, the precision
required in order to define becomes virtually impossible. Thus, attempts to define ‘dishonesty’, following
the decision in R V GHOSH (1982)7, have become very difficult. Doubts as to the meaning of the word
‘natural’ in expressions such as ‘natural justice’ remain even after frequent and complex attempts at
definition. Further, given advances in epistemology – the theory of knowledge and its methods and
validation – how ought we to interpret the vital word ‘knowledge’

Definition of jurisprudence according to Allen,

Notwithstanding these and other problems arising from verbal analysis and an expanding subject area,
‘useful’ definitions are plentiful. Their usefulness rests, for the student, in their power to point an inquirer
in certain directions, and to adumbrate, even in a rough manner only, the essential features of the field of
5
Outlines of historical of jurisprudence, vol 1
6
Hart, H.L.A. (1973). The Concept of Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
7
R V Ghosh (1982)

| [School]
MOHAMED ABUBAKAR
 study. Such definitions range from the prosaic (‘the skill or knowledge of law’: Cotgrave) to the lapidary
(‘the knowledge of things divine and human, the knowledge of the just and unjust’: Ulpian); from the terse
(‘the scientific analysis of the law’s essential principles’: Allen) to the verbose (‘any careful and sustained
thinking about any phase of things legal, if the thinking seeks to reach beyond the practical solution of an
immediate problem in hand’: Llewellyn). Definitions of this type represent the continuing, valuable
attempts of jurists to determine the essential qualities and characteristics of a subject area 8.

An attempt to define jurisprudence may be of particular value if the processes involved are systematic, that
is, if they are related to an identifiable objective and necessitate a search for unique and characteristic
qualities. This demands awareness of the vast area of knowledge subsumed under the general heading of
‘jurisprudence’. There is no other area of legal studies which is so extensive. Indeed, with the possible
exception of ‘philosophy’ itself, there can be few divisions of knowledge with such a wide-ranging content
as that of jurisprudence. A glance at a bibliography of jurisprudence can be a sobering experience, for few
areas of knowledge seem at first sight to be outside the scope of the jurist’s studies. Politics, sociology,
economics, ethics, semantics, psychology – all impinge on the literature of jurisprudential thought. The
search for a definition of jurisprudence must, therefore, take into account a wide variety of human
experience and must attempt to exclude the totally irrelevant. The search for relevant characteristics and
qualities cannot but be valuable in itself for those seeking to comprehend the overall basis of the subject 9.

Definition of jurisprudence according to Reich,

The search for a base upon which a definition might be erected ought to produce a growing awareness of
disciplinary inter relationships. At first sight, it would seem, for example, that the connections between
recent advances in the study of the neuronic basis of motor activity in the human body, and the concepts of
‘motivation’ and ‘intention’ in the criminal law, are very slight. Research has suggested, however, the
existence of connecting links between our physical nature as reflected in brain activity, and our subjective
goals – the very stuff of some areas of jurisprudential speculation. The changing concepts of the nature of
property, in relation to issues of social responsibility, as reflected in the work of Reich, Glendon and Gray,
the mounting dissatisfaction with the McNaughten Rules when considered in the context of current
research into mental trauma, exemplify the bonds between seemingly disparate disciplines, the significance
of which will emerge swiftly in any methodical attempt to study the dimensions of the ‘concept field’ of
today’s jurisprudence prior to attempting a precise definition. The essential unity of all knowledge is
mirrored in the contributory sources of legal theory, so that those who seek for a comprehensive definition
would reject as facile a definition of jurisprudence as ‘a study of the workings of a legal system’ 10.

The meaning of jurisprudence according to Ulpian,

| [School]
MOHAMED ABUBAKAR
 The attempt to construct an adequate definition of jurisprudence will necessitate an examination of some of
the better-known examples. This activity can provide a profound insight into the significance of historical
context for an understanding of some aspects of legal theory. Consider the celebrated definition attributed
to Ulpian (‘the knowledge of things divine and human ...’). Here is language used in a fashion which
represents clearly the manner in which a third-century Roman jurist and imperial official conceptualized
his world. Pound, writing in 20th century America, and defining jurisprudence as ‘a consideration of the
ethical and social merits of legal rules’, reflects the mores and aspirations of an important social and
intellectual group within that country. Legal theories and definitions are not produced in vacuo: hence, the
search for a definition can led to a valuable consideration of the historical circumstances which have
attended the growth of those theories.

The meaning of jurisprudence according to Wundt,

A further valuable product of the quest for definition may emerge in deepened understanding of the long
pattern of development which has produced modern jurisprudence. Each generation of legal thinkers stands
on the shoulders of its predecessors. (‘In a sense, we are all Epigones’: Wundt.) The definitions favored by
one generation do not appear spontaneously, but are often rooted in the legal and social complexities of
previous eras. Thus, attempts by the American positivists of the early 20th century to define jurisprudence
in instrumental terms indicate the evolution of legal thought as part of a continuing line of theoretical
analysis. Awareness of this aspect of legal thought is deepened by an examination of comparative
definitions11.

However, reference was made above to objections raised against the very process of definition as applied
to jurisprudence, in particular to the difficulties held to be insuperable in relation to ‘infinite regressions.
Allied to these objections, and arising from the difficulties of the process, is the condemnation of the
search for definition as a diversion from the more important task of discovering ‘the rational
interdependence and ultimate significance’ of legal thought. Definitions of jurisprudence, it is suggested,
can be no more than highly subjective reactions to phenomena, which add little, if anything, to our
understanding of the ‘true’ objective nature of those phenomena. Concentration upon description or
definition is seen as removing attention from the coherence of theory. (It is not made clear, however, in
what sense description vitiates coherence of thought.)

11
Wundt we are all Epigones

| [School]
MOHAMED ABUBAKAR