Between The Formal Rationality And Substantial Rationality

In 20 th century, western legal philosophy the debate on the relation between law and morality is conspicuous, as participant, Hart and Fuller put forward different views and opinions. Their differences come from the different location of the law. Hart stick to his “separation point” for academic independence, academic tradition and practice problem consciousness, he construct the legal system by the internal point and external point of the law and the combination of primary rules and secondary rules to pursuit of method of uncertainty and social ideals of liberalism. Hart’s location of the law is independence and certainty. And then Fuller’s “combined point” pose a question to Hart’s “separate point” from the effectiveness of law legitimacy of law and the value of law. He proposed a law should have eight basic principles, he adhere to the law should have its own morality, otherwise it is not a law. Fuller’s location of law is formal rationality. Even through Hart and fuller’s point different, but in essence they all expressed their own point from different way about how to implementation the target of the rule of law in common: one is to ensure the deterministic of law; two is to stick to the critic of law; Three is to maintain the authority of law. In summary is to stick to formal rationality and be prudent and cautious of substantial rationality.Such consensus under the rule of law to the current situation of our country has a great significance.