Abstract

This paper pursues three goals. First, some traditional concepts of ‘legal science’ will be analysed, and a definition of ‘legal science ampio sensu’, ‘legal science stricto sensu’ and ‘legal dogmatics’ will be proposed. Second, a reconstruction of five models of ‘legal science ampio sensu’ will be presented to show the different methodological alternatives available to legal scholars. Third, I claim that it is necessary (for conceptual reasons) to argue for moral reasons when choosing a legal method. Finally, I offer some arguments for supporting the five methodological alternatives of legal science ampio sensu.