Reassessing Reductionism in Logical Positivism: A Dogmatic Legal Critique
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.14421/sh.ctp9wt61Keywords:
Dogmatic Legal Science, Logical Positivism, Reductionism, Legal EpistemologyAbstract
Despite its long-standing dominance in dogmatic legal science, logical positivism has been increasingly criticized for its tendency to reduce law to a purely normative and formal system. While extensive scholarship has examined legal positivism in general, the specific problem of reductionist assumptions within logical positivism—and their implications for dogmatic legal science—remains insufficiently explored. This article aims to critically examine the reductionist assumptions underlying logical positivism from the perspective of dogmatic legal science, with particular attention to their epistemological consequences. This study adopts a normative–doctrinal legal method combined with conceptual and critical approaches to analyze the epistemological foundations of reductionism in logical positivism. The analysis draws on legal positivist theory and its critiques, particularly dogmatic legal theory and critical jurisprudence, to assess the limitations of reductionist reasoning in legal analysis. The study finds that reductionist assumptions in logical positivism significantly limit the capacity of dogmatic legal science to account for the social, moral, and interpretative dimensions of law, thereby narrowing its epistemological scope. This article contributes to legal theory by demonstrating the need for a more context-sensitive and interdisciplinary framework within dogmatic legal science to overcome the epistemological limitations of logical positivism.
References
Andreas Lundberg and Emma Söderman, “Border Work as Socio-Legal Activist Research,” International Journal of Law in Context 21, no. 4 (2025): 622–637, https://doi.org/10.1017/S1744552325100268.
Artha, Angela, and Tyara Ananda. “Teori Positivisme Hukum” 8, no. 11 (2024): 60–72.
Asnawi, Habib Shulton. “Membongkar Paradigma Positivisme Hukum Dalam Pemberantasan Korupsi Di Indonesia: Pemenuhan Hak Asasi Manusia Dalam Negara Hukum.” Supremasi Hukum: Jurnal Kajian Ilmu Hukum 2, no. 2 (2013). https://doi.org/10.14421/sh.v2i2.1933.
Austin, John. The Province of Jurisprudence Determined. John Murray, 1832.
Benjamin van Rooij, “Holistic Behavioral Jurisprudence: Unpacking the Complexity of Law and Behavior,” Jerusalem Review of Legal Studies 28, no. 1 (2023): 95–111. https://doi.org/10.1093/jrls/jlad024.
Bix, Brian. Jurisprudence: Theory and Context, 2015.
Boaventura de Sousa Santos. “Law: A Map of Misreading.” Journal of Law and Society 14, no. 3 (1987): 279.
Leiter, Brian, Why Legal Positivism? (December 10, 2009). U of Chicago, Public Law Working, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1521761 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1521761
Cahya Wulandari. “Kedudukan Moralitas Dalam Ilmu Hukum.” Jurnal Hukum Progresif 8, no. 1 (2020): 14. https://doi.org/10.14710/hp.8.1.1-14.
Carl Gillett, Reduction, Emergence, and the Metaphysics of Science (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2025), doi: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009083423.
Christiani, Widowati dan Herliana. “Nalar Mazhab Sosiologis Dalam Penemuan Hukum Yang Berkeadilan Oleh Hakim.” Jurnal Hukum & Pembangunan 51, no. 2 (2021): 255. https://doi.org/10.21143/jhp.vol51.no2.3050.
Crummey C. One-System Integrity and The Legal Domain of Morality. Legal Theory. 2022;28(4):269-297. doi:10.1017/S1352325222000155
David G. Hays. “The Challenge of the Holistic Nature of the Social Sciences to Positivism.” Journal of Philosophy and Social Science 18, no. 4 (2003): 48.
Devika Hovell, “The Elements of International Legal Positivism,” Current Legal Problems 75, no. 1 (2022): 71–109, https://doi.org/10.1093/clp/cuac003.
Diah Imaningrum Susanti. Penafsiran Hukum: Teori Dan Metode. Jakarta: Sinar Grafika, 2019.
Duncan Kennedy, A. A Critique of Adjudication. Harvard University Press, 1998.
Dworkin, Ronald M. “The Model of Rules,” 1968, 14–46.
Eugen Ehrlich. Fundamental Principles of the Sociology of Law. New York: Arno Press, 1975.
Ẹniọlá Ànúolúwapọ́ Ṣóyẹmí, “Participation and Law’s Authority,” Canadian Journal of Law & Jurisprudence 36, no. 2 (May 29, 2023): 491–524, https://doi.org/10.1017/cjlj.2023.9.
Galih Orlando. “Hukum Sebagai Kontrol Sosial Dan Social Enggineering (Telaah Terhadap Undang-Undang Nomor 16 Tahun 2019 Tentang Perubahan Undang-Undang Nomor 1 Tahun 1974 Tentang Perkawinan).” Tarbiyah Bil Qalam : Jurnal Pendidikan Agama Dan Sains 7, no. 1 (2023): 31–48. https://doi.org/10.58822/tbq.v7i1.111.
Gareth Davies, “The Relationship between Empirical Legal Studies and Doctrinal Legal Research,”Erasmus Law Review 13, no. 3 (2020): 144–155.
https://doi.org/10.5553/ELR.000141.
Gkouvas, Triantafyllos. 2023. “What Makes Law Law: Categorial Trends in Analytic Legal Metaphysics.” Jurisprudence 14 (4): 480–509. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/20403313.2023.2219127.
Gustav Radbruch. “Statutory Lawlessness and Supra-Statutory Law.” Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 26, no. 1 (1946): 1–11.
H.L.A. Hart. The Concept of Law. United Kingdom: Oxford University Press, 1961.
Habibani. Rhaysya Admmi dan Siti Fatimah. “Positivisme: Konsep, Perkembangan, Dan Implementasi Dalam Kajian Ilmu Pengetahuan Dan Hukum.” CENDEKIA: Jurnal Ilmu Pengetahuan 4, no. 4 (2024): 532. https://doi.org/10.51878/cendekia.v4i4.3831.
Halim, Abd. “Teori-Teori Hukum Aliran Positivisme Dan Perkembangan Kritik-Kritiknya.” Jurnal Asy-Syir’ah 42, no. 2 (2009): 396–97.
Hans J. Morgenthau, “Hans J. Morgenthau’s Critique of Legal Positivism: Politics, Justice and the Nature of International Law,” International Studies in Philosophy (2023): article, https://doi.org/10.1007/s42439-023-00076-x.
Hans Kelsen. Pure Theory of Law. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1967.
Hart, Herbet Lionel Adolphus. “Positivism and the Separation of Law and Morals.” Law and Morality 71, no. 4 (2012): 593–629.
Pratama Herry Herlambang, “Positivisme dan Implikasinya Terhadap Ilmu dan Penegakan Hukum,” Indonesian State Law Review (ISLRev) 2, no. 1 (2019): 336–42, https://doi.org/10.15294/islrev.v2i1.36187.
———. “Positivisme Dan Implikasinya Terhadap Ilmu Dan Penegakan Hukum.” Indonesian State Law Review (ISLRev) 2, no. 1 (2019): 336–42. https://doi.org/10.15294/islrev.v2i1.36187.
I Dewa Gede Atmadja dan Nyoman Putu Budiartha. Teori-Teori Hukum. Setara Press Kelompok Intrans Publishing Wisma Kalimetro. Malang, 2018.
I Gusti Bagus Rai Utama. “Filsafat Ilmu Dan Logika,” 2013.
Jennifer Lee, Bálint Tóth, dan Emily Carter, “Post-Truth Politics and Legal Epistemology: The Erosion of Legal Facts in Polarized Democracies,” Interdisciplinary Studies in Society, Law, and Politics 4, no. 2 (2025): 248–264, https://doi.org/10.61838/kman.isslp.4.2.22.
John Rawls. A Theory of Justice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1971.
Joxerramon Bengoetxea, “Legal Institutions and the Comparison of Legal Cultures,” Oñati Socio-Legal Series 12, no. 6 (2022): 1647–1673.
https://doi.org/10.35295/osls.iisl/0000-0000-0000-1361.
Lon L. Fuller. The Morality of Law. New Heaven: Yale University Press, 1969.
Mahrus Ali. “Mahkamah Konstitusi Dan Penafsiran Hukum Yang Progresif.” Jurnal Konstitusi 7, no. 1 (2010): 90. https://doi.org/10.31078/jk715.
Michael J. Perry. The Political Morality of Liberal Democracy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1999.
Mikhail Antonov, “Theory of Law and Socio-Legal Research,” Law. Journal of the Higher School of Economics 18, no. 2 (2025): 272–294, https://doi.org/10.17323/2072-8166.2025.2.272.294.
Moritz Schlick. General Theory of Knowledge. Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1936.
Morten Bøe,“Dogmatik and International Criminal Law: Approximations in the Realm of ‘Language’ and ‘Grammar’,” Goettingen Journal of International Law 13, no. 1 (2023): 120–162.
https://doi.org/10.3249/1868-1581-13-1-boe.
Muhammad, Abdulkadir. “Hukum Dan Penelitian Hukum” 8, no. 1 (2004): 134.
Otto Neurath. Empiricism and Sociology. Dordrecht: Reidel Publishing Company, 1931.
Patrick Bondy, “Epistemic and Legal Normativity: Reasons, Guidance, Rights, and Capacities,” Topoi 44 (2025): 853–862, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11245-025-10195-3.
Prasetyo, Yogi. “Social Reality as Legal Authenticity (Criticism of Bad Positive Laws in Legislation).” Fiat Justisia: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum 15, no. 3 (2021): 255–68. https://doi.org/10.25041/fiatjustisia.v15no3.2194.
Prasetyo, Yogi, Imam Zaelani, and Rangga Sakti. “Analisis Perkembangan Epistemologi Hukum Di Indonesia Dalam Upaya Membangun Konvergensi Epistemologi Hukum.” Jurnal Cakrawala Hukum 10, no. 1 (2019): 96–106. https://doi.org/10.26905/idjch.v10i1.2501.
Quine, W.V.O. “Two Dogmas of Empiricism.” Journal of Philosophical Review 60, no. 1 (1951): 20.
Karen Crowther, “What Is the Point of Reduction in Science?” Erkenntnis 85 (2020): 1437–1460, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10670-018-0085-6.
Robert Cotterrel. Law’s Community: Legal Theory in Sociological Perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995.
Roberto Unger. The Critical Legal Studies Movement. Harvard University Press, 1986.
Roger Cotterrell. “Law’s Community: Legal Theory in Sociological Perspective.” Journal of Oxford 24, no. 5 (1995): 562.
Ronald Dworkin. Law’s Empire. Harvard University Press, 1986.
Roscoe Pound. An Introduction to the Philosophy of Law. New Heaven: Yale University Press, 1922.
Rudolf Carnap. The Logical Structure of the World. University of California Press, 1928.
Sander Verhaegh, “Logical Positivism: The History of a ‘Caricature’,”Isis: A Journal of the History of Science Society 115, no. 1 (2024): 46–64. https://doi.org/10.1086/728796.
Sascha Nanlohy, “Geopolitics and Genocide: Patron Interests, Client Crises, and Realpolitik,” Journal of Global Security Studies 9, no. 1 (January 9, 2024): 112–130, https://doi.org/10.1093/jogss/ogad023
Sarmadi, Askuris. “Membebaskan Positivisme Hukum Ke Ranah Hukum Progresif (Studi Pembacaan Teks Hukum Bagi Penegak Hukum).” Jurnal Dinamika Hukum 12, no. 2 (2012). https://doi.org/10.20884/1.jdh.2012.12.2.58.
Schauer, Federick. The Force of Law. Harvard University Press, 2015.
Schultz, Duane P dan Sydney Ellen Schultz. Studi Tentang Sejarah Psikologi : Seri Sejarah Psikologi Modern, 2023.
Skyttner, Lars. General Systems Theory: Problems, Perspectives, Practice, 2006. https://doi.org/10.1142/5871.
Sulistyawan, Aditya Yuli. “Epistemologi Hukum (Yang) Subjektif Sebagai Jalan Mewujudkan Hukum Yang Berperi-Kemanusiaan.” Jurnal Hukum Progresif 7, no. 1 (2019): 98. https://doi.org/10.14710/hp.7.1.98-107.
Thomas S. Kuhn. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1962.
Triantafyllos Gkouvas, “What Makes Law Law: Categorial Trends in Analytic Legal Metaphysics,” Jurisprudence 14, no. 4 (2023): 480–509, https://doi.org/10.1080/20403313.2023.2219127.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Gilang Kresnanda Annas, M. Nurlaili Dwi Kurniyanto, Eza Tri Yandy, Nilam Amalia Fatiha
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
