caa a22 4500 388073993 CHVBK 20180307125156.0 cr unu---uuuuu 161130e199901 xx s 000 0 eng 10.1017/S0841820900002113 doi S0841820900002113 pii (NATIONALLICENCE)cambridge-10.1017/S0841820900002113 Allan James Internal and Engaged or External and Detached? [Elektronische Daten] [James Allan] A legal theory, any legal theory, necessarily adopts one of two perspectives or vantages or points-of-view. The author of a legal theory may take up the internal, engaged vantage or the external, detached vantage. If he seeks to explore, say, how judges should decide hard cases then his theory, explicitly or implicitly, will adopt an internal participant's perspective. Most likely, he will be putting himself in the shoes of the judge (or alternatively, asserting that we are all judges of a sort) in order to convince others of how best this role can be performed. Less likely, will be he who is a revolutionary and who thinks that the judge should decide cases in such a way as to contribute to the subversion of the legal system. In either event, both will be prescribing. Prescription, answering the ‘ought' and the ‘should', presupposes an involvement in the question and a concern with some evaluative dispute (though the revolutionary clearly does not accept the norms of his legal system as binding). Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1999 The Canadian Journal of Law and Jurisprudence Cambridge University Press 12/1(1999-01), 5-16 0841-8209 12:1<5 1999 12 CJL https://doi.org/10.1017/S0841820900002113 text/html Onlinezugriff via DOI 1 research-article jats NATIONALLICENCE 856 40 https://doi.org/10.1017/S0841820900002113 text/html Onlinezugriff via DOI NATIONALLICENCE 100 1- Allan James NATIONALLICENCE 773 0- The Canadian Journal of Law and Jurisprudence Cambridge University Press 12/1(1999-01), 5-16 0841-8209 12:1<5 1999 12 CJL CC0 http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0 nationallicence BK010053 XK010053 XK010000 NATIONALLICENCE NATIONALLICENCE NL-cambridge