Roscoe Pound and Problems of Contemporary Jurisprudence
Dissertation, Cornell University (
2004)
Copy
BIBTEX
Abstract
Roscoe Pound is one of the greatest American jurists ever. His legal theory may cast light on many of the current problems of law and jurisprudence. ;This dissertation can be divided in two big parts. The first part is a general introduction to the legal thinking of Pound. The second part deals with some particular topics that were treated by Pound: the distinction between rules and principles, the theory of interests and the limits of effective legal action. In the selection of those particular problems, several criteria have been taken into account, such as their current importance, their potentialities, or the degree of originality of Pound's own contribution to them. ;The bibliographical research has comprised the writings of Roscoe Pound, general and particular studies on his thinking, works that put the author in context, and finally, works that deal with the specific topics that are the object of the second part of the dissertation. ;The aim of Pound's philosophy, that is, the adaptation of the American common law to the always changing social conditions, defines him as a reformist who showed a great respect for the tradition and its values. He has exerted an immense influence in contemporary American legal culture, where many of his ideas have become commonplace. In particular, Pound formulated the distinction between rules and principles that is today one of the main objects of academic discussion in world jurisprudence and that has caused an important change in the dominant paradigm of legal science during the twentieth century, legal positivism. His theory of interests, even if in a vulgarized form, exerted an important influence in the theory and practice of law in twentieth century America. As for the limits of law, a subject originally systematized by Pound, it emerges today as a field of many theoretical and practical potentialities. ;Although Pound has not lately received much attention, his pragmatist philosophy has more value than the purely historical. Some of the features of his thinking can be profitably emphasized yet, while others deserve further development