Philosophical Theories on the Relationship between Law and Morality

Abstract

The relationship between law and morality has always been one of the most debated questions in jurisprudence, and this paper looks into the philosophical foundations of that connection by focusing on three key schools of thought, namely Natural Law theory, Legal Positivism, and modern interpretivism, it discusses how natural law scholars like Thomas Aquinas and John Finnis view law as deeply rooted in morality, arguing that laws which are unjust do not really qualify as valid law, on the other hand, legal positivists such as John Austin and H. L. A. Hart take a different position, separating law from morality and suggesting that legal validity comes from recognized sources and authority rather than moral reasoning, the paper also engages with the interpretivist perspective of Ronald Dworkin, who tries to bridge this gap by bringing moral principles into the process of legal interpretation, using a doctrinal research method, the study critically reviews these theories and points out the continuing tension between legal certainty and moral justice, overall it suggests that neither a complete separation nor a total merger of law and morality fully explains modern legal systems, and that a more balanced, middle-ground approach seems more practical.