Review About Debate Between Hart And Fuller

In the '50s and '60s of the 20th century, there was a debate between Hart and Fuller, which was on the relationship between law and morality and on if "law in reality" and the "natural law" can be separated. That is to say, if the relationship between law and morality is necessary. The debate took place after the Second World War, just when the Nuremberg Trial was punishing crimes against humanity during the war in Germany, then accomplices and informants used the Nazi rule to defend themselves during the trial. During the war, when they should do so in accordance with the law, but the law-abiding in the discharge of their civic obligations, in order to stand the risk of being punished. The most direct incentive to this debate as "informant case" is a typical representative of these cases. The dominant position before the legal positivism of the logic on this issue encountered difficulties , because these "these perpetrators of the legitimate" truly abide by the law, but they are in compliance with the legal and moral standard ,which is evil. From the legal point of view of the evidence, it seems to be a ground for exemption. But let these war criminals be not punished it is difficult for people's felling to accept. Then legal Positivism is in the face of hardship. When natural Law raised the moral evil of the law is not the law, and there is no need to comply with the legal proposition. To a certain extend, this seems that the problems have been solved by the above logic. But this has caught on the debate between Hart and Fuller, and in the end which is in- evitable associated which the relationship between law and morality. Hart adhered to the position of rejection of legal positivism inevitably linked with morality. Fuller insisted that the natural law and the contrary view, the resulting debate and aggravation. This debate is of tremendous historical value. It is on the bases of the debate both Hart and Fuller gain great academic success, and law has had considerable progress. Law and the new classics "legal concept," Fuller representative work "The morality of laws" are written on the basis of this polemic; in the social and historical background of World War II. So this current debate becomes a catalyst for the starting of the new analytical law and for the rejuvenation of the natural law. This paper tries to clarify the historical context of this debate and theoretical texture. We explore the theory and then bring enlightenment to the current debate on the current social realities of enterprises with legal and moral issues pertaining to the relationship with the benefit of the solution.First, on the basis of the analysis of the historical polemics after Hart and Fuller, the article illustrates social and historical background and theoretical origins. The second part of the article on Hart Fuller battle with the legal and moral issues involves in the attempt to conduct the analysis. And Evidence, the author will attempt to show Fuller Hart and the polemics of the results of the analysis combined with the social reality, doing some useful exploring in order to avoid empty. At the conclusion of the article, I try to impose their own views on the debate in Fuller Hart with the most simple expression language and image: Hart and Fuller is a battle that is not the judgment of right and wrong, but a different world outlook and methodology in the history of jurisprudence arena for the display. The process is full of fierce fighting, but nobody is hurt, on the contrary, natural law and legal positivism are therefore benefit, and the same is true of the entire law is concerned.