Every society is identified by some form of social order, some way to mark and inspire acceptable behavior, discourage unacceptable behavior and mannerism to resolve disputes. Then what is it that distinguishes one society from another and better still, one law within a society from another? To answer the whys’ and hows’ is an uphill task, thanks to its sources of inference which are as diverse as human psyche. Human behavior is ruled by the morals and beliefs that he has been following, many times just following without comprehending.
Law like morality is as vague as can be and can’t be bound in words or phrases. Though inferred variedly, the objective of each law is to make people follow it, to make it a guiding star so as to bring an order in the society. It evolves dynamically and changes face to bring about a normalcy to certain norms in society. It succeeds most of the time in its endeavor as law is coercive in nature rather than submissive. Instead of telling the followers what to do, it aims at telling its office of law to perform in a particular way if a follower (subject) behaves in a particular way.
There are mainly two schools of law: the Legal Positivism and the Natural School of Law. Legal positivism is a thesis that vouches for the belief that existence and nature of law solely depend on facts rather than on its merits. According to legal positivism that started with the start of nineteenth century, the following are the definitions of law:
- Laws are rules.
- The legal concepts are open to discussion but not in conjunction with sociological implications.
- The law is based on "how it is" and not on "how it ought to be".
- There is no place for a rational support of morality.
It is a liberal ideology that works at bringing about social reforms for the betterment of the society. Its deliberate intention of making laws lends it a very "rule like" outlook. Legal positivism further opines that the condition for interpreting a legal norm as "constitutionally binding" should be another norm rather than anything else.
The natural school of law on the contrary promotes the belief that laws are a result of conscious human thinking. It does not separate terms like how "law is" and how it "ought to be". Human values play an important role in the natural school of law as opposed to the societal welfare in positivist theory of law.
A facet of law that finds mention in the positivist theory of law is its fallibility. We can connect to this aspect more easily as it states that law does not necessarily always satisfy conditions by which it is assessed. If a law seems just to one party, it may not be the view of another; it should also protect morale rights of human but the case might not be possible always.