Questions and Answers - Get Expert Answers to Your Queries

Answer:-

The Hart-Fuller debate is a famous legal philosophical exchange between H.L.A. Hart, a legal positivist, and Lon Fuller, a natural law theorist. The debate centers around the relationship between law and morality. Hart argued that law is a system of rules, distinct from morality. He believed that laws can exist independently of whether they are morally just. For Hart, the validity of a law is determined by whether it follows the correct legal procedures, not by its moral content.

Fuller, on the other hand, argued that law inherently has a moral dimension. He proposed that laws must adhere to certain principles of justice and fairness to be considered valid. For Fuller, a legal system that completely disregards morality cannot truly be called a legal system because law, by its nature, aims to serve human purposes and uphold social order.

The debate arose in the context of post-World War II legal trials, where Nazi-era laws were challenged. Hart would argue that even if immoral, those laws were still valid under their legal system. Fuller would contend that such laws, being morally corrupt, lack legitimacy. This debate remains foundational in understanding the complex relationship between law and morality in legal theory.