New Legal Theory Concept: Integrative-Tetradic Realism Theory
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
The absence of a legal theory that holistically integrates the four pillars legal certainty, substantive justice, social utility, and public participation, poses a key challenge in addressing the complexities of modern law, which is increasingly pluralistic and dynamic. This study aims to formulate and evaluate the Integrative-Tetradic Realism Theory as a new legal paradigm. Using a normative juridical method with a conceptual approach and theory-comparison techniques, the research develops a comprehensive and systematic synthesis relevant to contemporary legal dynamics. The results show that Integrative-Tetradic Realism offers a holistic and transformative paradigm, addressing limitations of classical theories such as positivism, natural law, realism, and Critical Legal Studies. By integrating normative, sociological, philosophical, and practical dimensions, and emphasizing its four pillars, this theory provides an adaptive framework that balances legal structures, moral values, social contexts, and public participation. It aims to create a legal system that is normatively valid, just, contextual, and responsive to societal changes. Acting as a bridge between ideal law and empirical reality, it offers a conceptual foundation for inclusive, ethical, and functional legal reform in modern society.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
References
M. T. F. Tamanaha, “Law as a Means to an End: Threat to the Rule of Law,” Cambridge Univ. Press, 2017.
J. Coleman, “The Practice of Principle: In Defence of a Pragmatist Approach to Legal Theory,” Oxford Univ. Press, 2019.
R. Alexy, “A Theory of Constitutional Rights,” Oxford Univ. Press, 2017.
B. Leiter, “Naturalizing Jurisprudence: Essays on American Legal Realism and Naturalism in Legal Philosophy,” Oxford Univ. Press, 2015.
A. Hunt, “Explorations in Law and Society: Toward a Constitutive Theory of Law,” Routledge, vol. 2019.
M. Del Mar, “A Philosophy of Private Law,” Routledge, 2015.
K. E. Himma, “The epistemology of law,” Stanford Encycl. Philos., 2019.
M. Freeman, “Lloyd’s Introduction to Jurisprudence, 9th ed.,” Sweet & Maxwell, 2017.
A. Sarat and T. R. Kearns, “Law in the Domains of Culture,” Univ. Michigan Press, 2018.
D. M. Trubek and M. J. Santos, “The new law and development: a critical appraisal,” Cornell Int. Law J., vol. 53, no. 3, pp. 457–530, 2020.
M. J. C. Vile, “Constitutionalism and the Separation of Powers,” Lib. Fund, 2015.
P. Fitzpatrick, “Modernism and the Grounds of Law,” Cambridge Univ. Press, 2016.
T. R. Tyler, “Why people obey the law,” Princet. Univ. Press, 2019.
H. L. A. Hart, “The Concept of Law, 3rd ed.,” Oxford Univ. Press, 2017.
J. Rawls, “A Theory of Justice,” Harvard Univ. Press, 2018.
C. Sunstein, “The Ethics of Influence: Government in the Age of Behavioral Science,” Cambridge Univ. Press, 2016.
N. MacCormick, “Legal Reasoning and Legal Theory,” Oxford Univ. Press, 2016.
L. M. Friedman, “The Legal System: A Social Science Perspective,” Russell Sage Found., 2017.
R. Dworkin, “Law’s Empire,” Harvard Univ. Press, 2017.
P. Legrand, “The Impossibility of Legal Transplants,” Oxford Univ. Press, 2018.
J. Rawls, “A Theory of Justice,” Harvard Univ. Press, 1999.
B. Leiter, “Naturalizing Jurisprudence: Essays on American Legal Realism and Naturalism in Legal Philosophy,” Oxford Univ. Press, 2017.
J. Habermas, “Between Facts and Norms: Contributions to a Discourse Theory of Law and Democracy,” MIT Press, 1996.
M. M. Fajar and Sofyan, “Dualisme Penelitian Hukum Normatif dan Empiris,” Prenadamedia Gr., 2018.
D. Kairys, “The Politics of Law: A Progressive Critique, 3rd ed.,” Basic Books, 2019.