Moral Ideals Legitimize the Legal System
When law becomes solely an architecture of mandates, it risks degrading into "commands of naked power." Julius Stone argued that a system lacking external ethical criteria loses its legitimacy. Moral ideals and justice are not mere ornaments but the foundation that distinguishes a legal order from the dominance of force. Contemporary legal culture needs a return to Stone’s thought as a remedy for the crisis of positivism, restoring law's function of unifying society.
Stone’s Triad: A Synthesis of Logic, Ethics, and Sociology
Stone proposed a three-dimensional jurisprudence, combining logical analysis, the theory of justice, and the sociology of law. In this vision, logic is a compass protecting against arbitrariness, sociology is a mirror reflecting the real effects of norms, and morality is the question of the system's meaning. Stone modernizes the dispute between natural law (Blackstone) and positivism (Kelsen). Although Kelsen’s Grundnorm defines the boundaries of a pure science of law, Stone exposes its illusory sterility—every basic norm must ultimately appeal to social facts and values.
Illusory Reference and the Mechanisms of Organizing Liberty
Judges often employ categories of illusory reference, masking ethical choices under a cloak of formalism. Drawing from Kant and Stammler, Stone views law as the formal organization of liberty, where the boundaries of freedom are constantly negotiated. He utilizes Pound’s theory of interests to optimize law by maximizing satisfied claims with minimal friction. Crucial here is Ehrlich’s living law—the unwritten social order that determines the effectiveness of norms. Precision in analysis is provided by Hohfeld’s grid, deconstructing legal relations into rights and duties. An example of this synthesis is the case of Donoghue v. Stevenson, which transformed the moral command to love one's neighbor into the foundation of modern tort law.
Axiological Transparency in the Digital Age
Stone’s triad finds application in cases concerning AI and privacy, where state security must be weighed against individual autonomy. This method demands axiological transparency—the judge must openly articulate value conflicts instead of hiding behind the technical phrasing of a statute. There are differences in the reception of this thought: common law naturally sees the judge as a co-creator of law, while the continental system must still break the primacy of pure dogmatics in favor of diagnosing real social interests. This transparency enforces real judicial accountability for the decisions made.
Julius Stone’s Thought: Law as a Civilizational Project
Law, balancing on the edge of logic and values, becomes an arena of constant choice. Julius Stone’s thought teaches that a system without the idea of justice inevitably collapses into obedience and fear. In the pursuit of order and algorithmic consistency, will we forget the human being whom the law is meant to protect? Or perhaps justice is a necessary compass, without which every legal technique becomes merely a tool of oppression? The answer to this question defines the durability of our civilizational project.
📄 Full analysis available in PDF