Skip to main content

Naturalism in Legal Philosophy


The “naturalistic turn” that has swept so many areas of philosophy over the past three decades has also had an impact in the last decade in legal philosophy.


Methodological naturalists (M-naturalists) view philosophy as continuous with empirical inquiry in the sciences. Some M-naturalists want to replace conceptual and justificatory theories with empirical and descriptive theories; they take their inspiration from more-or-less Quinean arguments against conceptual analysis and foundationalist programs.


Other M-naturalists retain the normative and regulative ambitions of traditional philosophy, but emphasize that it is an empirical question what normative advice is actually useable and effective for creatures like us. Some M-naturalists are also substantive naturalists (S-naturalists). Ontological S-naturalism is the view that there exist only natural or physical things; semantic S-naturalism is the view that a suitable philosophical analysis of any concept must show it to be amenable to empirical inquiry.


Each of these varities of naturalism has applications in legal philosophy. Replacement forms of M-naturalism hold that: (1) conceptual analysis of the concept of law should be replaced by reliance on the best social scientific explanations of legal phenomena, and (2) normative theories of adjudication should be replaced by empirical theories.


These views are associated with American Legal Realism and Brian Leiter's reinterpretation of Realism. Normative M-naturalists, by contrast, inspired and led by Alvin Goldman, seek to bring empirical results to bear on philosophical and foundational questions about adjudication, the legal rules of evidence and discovery, the adversarial process, and so forth.


An older form of S-naturalism in legal philosophy, associated with Scandinavian Legal Realism, seeks a reduction of legal concepts to behavioral and psychological categories. More recent forms of S-naturalism, associated with a revival of a kind of natural law theory defended by David Brink and Michael Moore (among others), applies the “new” or “causal” theory of reference to questions of legal interpretation, including the interpretation of moral concepts as they figure in legal rules.



Comments

Anonymous said…
wonderful brother keep it up
October 20, 2008 at 11:16 AM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Smart Security, Free Society: Malaysia’s Data Dilemma

In today’s digitally driven world, national security is no longer confined to borders or traditional threats. Cyberattacks, disinformation campaigns, and asymmetric warfare have become the new frontiers of conflict. Malaysia, strategically located in Southeast Asia and increasingly exposed to regional tensions and internal vulnerabilities, must strengthen its security apparatus. However, doing so must not come at the cost of civil liberties. Malaysia can enhance its security strategy by leveraging insights from advanced data platforms like those pioneered by Palantir Technologies, while maintaining strong democratic oversight to safeguard the fundamental freedoms protected by the Federal Constitution. Palantir Technologies, a U.S.-based company, gained prominence in the aftermath of the September 11 attacks. Its core software, Gotham, was designed to integrate fragmented intelligence and provide real-time, actionable insights to military and intelligence agencies. Over the years,...
Post a Comment
Read more

Syringe Attacks in Malaysia and France: Random Violence or Terrorism? - Part 3

The syringe attack on the 12-year-old son of Pandan MP and former Economy Minister, Datuk Seri Rafizi Ramli, has shaken Malaysia. What initially appeared as a rare and bizarre incident now echoes a disturbing pattern witnessed abroad, notably in France. In June 2025, during the Fête de la Musique festival, over 145 people across France reported being pricked with syringes in crowded public areas. In both cases, the weapon of fear was not a gun or bomb but a syringe. When viewed together, the Rafizi incident and the mass needle attacks in France reveal an alarming global trend of unconventional, psychological violence that leaves behind not just physical uncertainty but emotional trauma. The question we must now ask is: are these acts simply random criminality, or should they be treated with the gravity of terrorist attacks? A Pattern Beyond Borders In France, the attacks spanned multiple cities, with 13 confirmed cases in Paris alone. Victims included women, men, and even min...
Post a Comment
Read more

Constitution of Malaysia: An Introduction Part 5

7 (1) No person shall be punished for an act or omission which was not punishable by law when it was done or made, and no person shall suffer greater punishment for an offence than was prescribed by law at the time it was committed. (2) A person who has been acquitted or convicted of an offence shall not be tried again for the same offence except where the conviction or acquittal has been quashed and a retrial ordered by a court superior to that by which he was acquitted or convicted.
Post a Comment
Read more