How does the Western classical natural law school and Chinese legal philosophy define the legal stat

1. The natural law school refers to the school of law that takes the natural law that manifests the harmonious order of the universe as the standard of justice, adheres to the absoluteness of justice, and believes that what truly embodies justice is the natural law that exists in the hearts of people outside the agreements made by human beings and the laws formulated by the state, rather than the rules themselves generated by people's agreements.

2. In a narrow sense, positivist jurisprudence refers to various schools of analytic jurisprudence. Therefore, it is also called analytical positivist jurisprudence, which emphasizes positive law, that is, law made by the state.

The basic view of the positivist school of law is that the scope of research of law is limited to positive law, and that proper law and morality should be studied in ethics. Law is an order of the sovereign of the state, a "closed logical system". On the question of the essential connection between law and morality, he advocates the view that laws that do not conform to morality do not affect the reality of law.

From this, it can be naturally deduced that the view that evil law is also law, which is also one of its main differences with the natural law school, which advocates the illegality of evil law, and the rationality of law on the basis of natural law and morality.

3. Social Law School: Starting from the social standard, it combines the traditional methods of law with the conceptual viewpoints and theoretical methods of sociology to study legal phenomena. It is a school of law that focuses on the social purpose and effect of law and emphasizes the integration of different social interests.

The main idea of the natural law school: The doctrine of natural law holds that in nature, and especially in the natural nature of man, there is a rational order, which provides an objective value position independent of the human will, and uses this position to critically evaluate the structure of law and politics. The original concept of rights in the natural law school was more tinged with "natural" rights, and people are born in nature, and human rights also come from nature.

The natural law school refers to the school of law that takes the natural law that manifests the harmonious order of the universe as the standard of justice, insists on the absoluteness of justice, and believes that the true embodiment of justice is the natural law that exists in the human heart outside the agreements made by human beings and the laws formulated by the state, rather than the rules themselves generated by the agreements of people.

The natural law school is the mainstream legal school in the world today. Representative figures such as Grotius, Locke, Montesquieu, Rousseau, Paine, Jefferson, etc. The natural law school attaches great importance to the objective basis and value goal of the existence of law, that is, human nature, reason, justice, freedom, equality, and order, and attaches importance to the exploration of the ultimate value goal and objective basis of law.

Natural law is a moral principle. Grotius pointed out that natural law is the legitimate norm of reason, which instructs that any action that is consistent with our reason and sociality is a morally just act; Rather, it is morally sinful.

The differences between the natural law school and the positive law school are as follows:

First of all, it should be emphasized that the trichotomy of natural law, positivist and social law is neither comprehensive nor accurate. Many of the jurists we are familiar with cannot be summarized and summarized by this trichotomy, such as Main and Stamler in the 19th century, Fuller, Radbruch, Dworkin, Unger, Posner and so on in the 20th century.

If we have to make typological generalizations, the core of the natural law school is that the "real" law is not a specific law of a country, but exists in a more transcendent place. The law is not limited by the changing ideas and opinions of a certain time and place, and the inherent rules and principles of the law are universally applicable and even eternal.

Interestingly, the modern natural law schools that are far away from us believe that the content of natural law can be understood and deduced entirely through the virtues of human reason, but many theorists of the revival of natural law in the twentieth century have a more obvious Catholic background, such as Maritan and Phoenix.

The simplest and most brutal summary is that the natural law school holds that law necessarily contains some substantial intrinsic value, such as fairness and justice, and that norms of behavior that lose some intrinsic value cannot be called law. The analytic arguments of the Positivist School are completely different from those of the old Qing Dynasty. It's a pretty confusing term.

To put it crudely, the difference between the natural law school and the positive law school reflects the most profound and irreconcilable conceptual difference in the field of jurisprudence, that is, the relationship between the ideal of law and the reality of law. If we don't care about the anachronism, we can even exaggerate to say that the controversy between Socrates and Sophists implies the difference between the natural law school and the positive law school.

The natural law school emphasizes the legitimacy of law, that is, legislation, justice, law enforcement, and whether the legal system and legal concept itself conform to the universal values of the greatest number of human beings, and believes that there is a higher standard above the positive law, that is, the law of ought, and all positive law that does not conform to the law of ought is not the real law, that is, "evil law is illegal";

The analytical positivist school of law emphasizes the law more, believing that any law formulated by the legislature of statutory legislative power in accordance with the statutory legislative procedures is the real law; However, it lacks consideration of the legitimacy of legislative power, the legitimacy of legislative procedures, and the legitimacy of positive law itself, so it is "a bad law is also a law", such as the German fascist "Law on the Elimination of People's Suffering".

The social law school emphasizes the role and influence of law on society, first acknowledging that law is a product of society, and the development of society determines the development of law, but at the same time emphasizes that law has an active and counterproductive effect on society. It is believed that a law that can produce a role in social life, that is, that achieves the purpose of legislation and has a positive effect on human society, is a real law, and vice versa is not a real law.

Characteristics of the classical school of natural law:

The first classical school of natural law is the origin of the school of Western law and philosophy, and the history of natural law is as long as the history of the development of Western legal thought.

The second classical school of natural law emphasizes that natural law is characterized by natural law, which is independent of substantive law and can effectively determine whether those positive laws are justified.

Third, the classical school of natural law has certain historical limitations because it is based on capitalist private ownership. Fourth, the classical school of natural law embodies the development of the concept of human rights.

The classical school of natural law is a school of law characterized by an emphasis on natural law.

It arose during the bourgeois revolutions in Europe from the 17th to the 18th centuries. The main representatives are Grotius and Spinoza in the Netherlands, Hobbes and Locke in England, Beccaria in Italy, Montesquieu in France, etc.

Emphasizing human rationality, human nature, and human rights, he advocated the formulation of a code of reading oaks in accordance with natural law, and put forward the principles of equality before the law and the legalization of crimes. It is believed that human beings have been pursuing hedonism, utilitarianism, the pursuit of pleasure, and the avoidance of pain.

In the anti-feudal enlightenment and revolutionary struggle of the century, it represented the interests of the emerging bourgeoisie and was characterized by an emphasis on self-reliance. One is called the natural law school.

Therefore, the term "classical" natural law school is called to distinguish it from the natural law doctrines of other eras (ancient, medieval, or 20th century) and to indicate that natural law doctrines were most prevalent in the century.

One is natural and the other is artificial.

The difference between the rule of law and the rule of law.

The classical school of law refers to a kind of secular natural law produced in the stage of Western liberal capitalism from the 17th to the 19th centuries, which was produced on the basis of natural law that criticized medieval theology, and was the product and sharp of the bourgeois anti-feudal struggle. Their representatives and tenants are Grettius's The Law of War and Peace, Hobbes's Leviathan, Locke's On the Treatise, Montesquieu's On the Spirit of Law, and Rousseau's The Social Contract. The natural law of this period had the following distinct features:

1. Take people as the starting point of research and take people's rationality as the starting point.

Law. the basis and the main criteria for measurement; 2. Emphasizing the rights of individuals and putting forward the theory of natural human rights; 3. The content of natural law is discussed in detail; 4. Combine the idea of natural law with the social contract, etc.;

However, at the end of the 19th century and the beginning of the 20th century, some Western jurists began to attach importance to and study the concept of natural law again, and the theory of natural law was resurrected after being treated in the cold for half the world, that is, the new natural law striker, and the representatives of this period and their works include the Frenchman Jacques Maritain's "Man and State", the Englishman John Phoenix's "Natural Law and Natural Rights", the American John Rawls's "A Theory of Justice" and Ronald Dworkin's "Take Rights Seriously". The new natural law of this period has the following characteristics: 1. A new interpretation of the concept of "natural law" is made, which is no longer understood as a kind of law parallel to positive law, but more understood as a law hidden behind the scenes that can play a guiding role in the implementation of written law; 2. Changing the previous belief that natural law is immutable, and now emphasizing the mutability and relativity of natural law; 3. Absorb and learn from the views and methods of other schools of law.

Classical natural law is a traditional legal theory that holds that natural law is a law that is not affected by human will and legislation, and is determined by the inner laws of God or nature. This theory holds that natural law is the basis of morality and law, and that human legislation can only follow natural law and cannot contradict it. Classical natural law became popular during the Renaissance and was widely influenced by the Enlightenment in the 17th and 18th centuries.