User:Aceoncctvshhhron/sandbox

=Jurist= A jurist is someone who professes law, someone who is not necessarily a professor, or a professional.

The act of professing, is stating something rationally; often not through the use of logical reasoning by and of itself.

Jurists do not profess law by rote, or by lists; instead they seek rational foundations for laws: they promulgate laws.

Legislation can be built upon such a promulgation, yet, often, logical reasoning is the preference of legislators, because rational foundations presuppose rational actions.

Where rational actions are vital, special regard for jurists is common, yet not where persons can significantly disagree on whether rational foundations should be cohesive or coherent.

In different professions; across academic disciplines; and working life; either cohesion, or coherence, are preferable.

Legal and Juristic Systems
A legal system is different from a juristic system. A legal system is given form by it's use of legislation, whilst a juristic system is given form by jurists.

Few juristic systems are also legal systems; with legislation commonly being written by legislators who are not jurists, because of the compatibility of "juristic laws" (legal principles) with social wants.

The Common Law legal system is a juristic and a legal system, where legislators are given responsibility over "legislative laws" (legislation), and jurists maintaining authority over a number of "juristic laws". The compatibility of the fewer "juristic laws" with the more numerous and changeable "legislative laws" is sometimes the subject of public debate, and political maneuvering, by legislators who either agree, or disagree, with jurists.

Juristic laws, though they are legal "principles", can also change.

For instance, ...

Some juristic laws are like sets: the foundations for other laws, they differentiate the foundations for applicable laws.

These sets can be modal, i.e. qualifying, or inset, i.e. hierarchical.

Where one set qualifies another, a different hierarchy can take root and only those laws apply; where merely inset, laws apply in accordance with positioning within the hierarchical bounds.

Modality changes root. Inset changes type within a root.

Religious and Juristic Laws
Priests, and jurists, find differentiation by the questions they ask.

Priests asking what is rational in relation with God, whilsts jurists ask what is rational in relation with a person's place within society.

Legislators also ask the juristic question, yet they are within society in a way that jurists are not.

Because legal principles are less changeable, jurists are not under the same social pressures that legislators are.

Prophetic laws also find differentiation from "priestly laws" (Canon Law and Natural Law) and "juristic laws" by relating laws with destiny on earth, or the breach, or simple lack, of prophetic ability amongst the general population; either in relation with destiny on earth, or heaven.

Philosophers and Jurists
Philosophers also ask questions of principle, but philosophy can ask questions beyond the scope of law. For instance: questions on the soul, or the spirit.

Legal Professors and Jurists
Law professors aim at bridging the principles of juristic laws with the social practice of the legal profession by administering the teaching of legal principles; simulations of the practice of the legal profession; and simultaneous professional training by lawyers themselves.

Jurists with legal training primarily profess laws through academic writing, and these sources are subsequently given shape by Judges.

Political Scientists and Jurists
Political Scientists ask questions of principle beyond political philosophy.

They investigate Social Laws, with careful differentiation from a single, unifiable, "Social Law".

It could be said that where jurists look for legal principles, political scientists look for the socio-legal principles.

Yet, legal principles necessarily operate within society, and nesting socio-legal principles within legal principles, or legal principles within socio-legal principles is a practical decision, dependant upon whether the jurist has training in law or political science.

Whereas jurists with training in law profess laws within legal academia, political scientists also profess laws within academic structures, but because Political Science lacks an official interpreter, like a Judge, Political Scientists primarily profess laws indirectly, through a wide variety of political bodies, via Bureaucrats, Civil Servants, and Political Advisers.

Substantivism, and positivism...

Academic structures...

Judges and Jurists
Judges, in common law legal systems, sometimes administer juristic laws, and shape them.

Lawyers and Jurists
Whereas jurists profess laws, lawyers are professionals, they act as representatives of clients within society. Thus, lawyers present the best possible representation of the client's position.

Politicians and Jurists
Where lawyers represent clients, politicians represent political parties.

Where lawyers plea before a judge, politicians "plea" before an electorate.

Both lawyers, and politicians, build representations taking account of those who they "plea" before.

Each has an interest in what jurists say, because the principles of what is rational in relation with a person's place within society provides them with a basis for understanding when a judge, or the electorate, or an element within the electorate, is wrong; but more usually lawyers and politicians take interest in what jurists say in order that they cross "red lines": of either the judge, or the electorate taken as a whole (the electorate sometimes prefering coherence, and not cohesion).

Early Jurists
Roman Law is the legal system of Ancient Rome. It is the foundation of the Civil Law legal system.

Juristic Systems
Brehon law

Ius Commune
Canon law, Civil Law overlapping with Feudal Law.

International Law
Francisco Suárez

Modern jurists
Religious law, and nation-state law, with European Union...