On the instrumental view of law in American legal culture

  • Brian Z. Tamanaha

    Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapterpeer-review

    4 Scopus citations

    Abstract

    Karl Llewellyn's “On Philosophy in American Law” was not a philosophical essay but rather a chronological survey of the impact of philosophical ideas about law in American legal culture since the founding. Llewellyn (1934: 206) made this clear at the outset of his essay: “Thus what is here before the telescope is the changing array not of verbalized philosophies, but of philosophies-in-action as the history of law in these United States has gone its way. What those philosophies were, what needs they served – and whose. I am not so much concerned with the philosophers themselves, with whom indeed my acquaintance is but scanty. I am concerned with philosophy-in-action, with implicit philosophy, with those premises, albeit inarticulate and in fact unthought, which yet make coherence out of a multiplicity of single ways of doing.” It is important to consider the impact of philosophical ideas in this sense, Llewellyn wrote, because “once a philosophy has been established in the habits and attitudes of any person, it has effects” (Llewellyn 1934: 206). An underlying theme of Llewellyn's survey is that philosophical ideas have time and again been enlisted in law to serve the powers that be. His sketch can be conveyed in a few strokes. Matters started off well enough at the founding and for several subsequent generations, Llewellyn suggests, during which judging was infused with ideas about natural law and right reason.

    Original languageEnglish
    Title of host publicationOn Philosophy in American Law
    PublisherCambridge University Press
    Pages27-34
    Number of pages8
    ISBN (Electronic)9780511576386
    ISBN (Print)9780521883689
    DOIs
    StatePublished - Jan 1 2009

    Fingerprint

    Dive into the research topics of 'On the instrumental view of law in American legal culture'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this