Law, Coercion and Folk Intuitions.

Area of Science:

• Legal Philosophy
• Sociology of Law
• Empirical Legal Studies

Background:

• Philosophical debates on whether legal systems are necessarily coercive often rely on abstract thought experiments.
• Critics argue these thought experiments lack relevance and that laypersons may perceive law as inherently coercive.
• Previous research has not systematically polled public opinion on the necessity of coercion in law.

Purpose of the Study:

• To empirically investigate the relationship between law and coercion.
• To challenge the traditional philosophical reliance on thought experiments by examining real-world perceptions.
• To assess the validity of claims regarding laypersons' views on law and coercion.

Main Methods:

• Conducted five empirical studies.
• Systematically polled the 'man on the Clapham Omnibus' (representing the general public).
• Analyzed findings on the public's perception of law and coercion.

Main Results:

• Findings indicate a complex relationship between law and coercion, challenging simplistic philosophical models.
• Empirical data provides insights into laypersons' understanding of legal systems.
• The study offers evidence regarding the widespread support for the view that law is necessarily coercive among the general populace.

Conclusions:

• The empirical findings challenge the adequacy of traditional philosophical thought experiments in understanding law.
• Public perception suggests a strong association between law and coercion, contrary to some philosophical intuitions.
• Further empirical research is needed to fully understand the multifaceted nature of law and its enforcement mechanisms.