In PartVII A short History of Jurisprudence the philosophic-dogmatic plan laid out for the analysis in Part I Introduction will be deviated from and a digression into the chronology of legal history will take precedence. Here the philosophic-dogmatic perspective of Hägerström’s analysis is contextualized and the emphasis of the analysis shifts to a chronological-empirical perspective, mainly describing the general traits of the central issue of jurisprudence from Roman antiquity to the 20th Century, namely the metaphysics of law, especially the metaphysics of qualified legal knowledge. Does jurisprudence correspond to the concept of ideal law or to the concept of positive law? The reason why such an empirical avenue must be introduced is that the philosophic-dogmatic analysis has its limitations, insofar as it, due to its formalistic nature, stresses internal congruency and coherency over correspondence to external reality and factual verification. The philosophic-dogmatic analysis may thus be internally consistent and coherent, and still lack correspondence to external facts and reality. In the historical part of the investigation the different dogmatic perspectives of law provided by natural law and various schools of legal positivism (the Historical School of jurisprudence, Begriffsjurisprudenz, Interessenjurisprudenz and so on) will serve as comparison material making a test of validity possible. Accordingly, the main purpose of Part VII is to reconnect the formal aspects of the investigation with its material, that is to say, to test whether or not the internal aspects of the investigation correspond to external facts. Hence, if the analysis of Hägerström’s ideas correspond to external, empirical facts - that is, correspond to the objective features of dogmatic perspectives of jurisprudence other than Hägerström’s - then the hypothesis of this investigation, namely that Hägerström’s critique was directed the unscientific elements of science and within the legal discourse that it constituted an attempt to safeguard the validity of jurisprudence, stands scrutiny and is accordingly verified. A further reason why the perspective shifts to the historical-empirical is p a r t 1 , i n t r o d u c t i o n 32
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjYyNDk=