Jurisprudence is usually understood as legal theories or philosophies of law. It is about the nature of law, which is considered to be the most challenging subject for law students. Despite the arguments in legal theories may usually base on abstract reasoning, understanding jurisprudence does not require substantive law knowledge. Jurisprudence deals with the relationships between morality, obligation and law. Even without a legal background, we can still understand the gist of jurisprudence.

This is a well-structured book for presenting the issues in jurisprudence systematically as well as demonstrating comparisons between different legal theories concisely. It helps readers grasp the key components of the theories propounded by those legal philosophers before reading the classics.

As accomplished legal scholars, both authors provide well-organised analysis of the most critical issues in legal theories. For example, this book first deals with a fundamental question: what is law. The authors then introduce readers to the theories made by famous philosophers, including H.L.A. Hart, Lon Fuller, Nigel Simmonds, John Finnis and Ronald Dworkin, setting out the background of the discussions and making concise comparisons before entering into the ‘debates’.

This book covers various topics, including natural law, legal positivism, legal reasoning and the relationship between law and morality. Its content has covered the major and important legal theories. The authors have selected issues about the nature of law which are worth pondering and discussing in modern life. For instance, what kind of things is justice? What are rights? Is it wrong in principle for the state to enforce morality? Are legal requirements simply orders backed by threats? All are related to our attitudes to the law and every one of us should have questions like those when we obey the law. The authors do not provide definite answers to those questions but let readers understand the core of the debates by organising theories of those legal philosophers. It allows readers to form their own opinions and engage in critical thinking.

You do not have to worry about whether the content of this book is inscrutable. The authors use a lot of examples and metaphors to explain the legal philosophers' points of view. The authors illustrate the points of argument in point forms and avoid jargon making this book accessible to general readers.