According to the six concepts of law, which philosophy would most discourage discretion?

The philosophy that most discourages discretion is centered around the concept of legal moralism. Legal moralism posits that the law should enforce societal moral standards and that behavior should be governed by adherence to these moral principles. This perspective tends to support a rigid interpretation of law, where discretion is minimized to ensure that legal standards are uniformly applied in accordance with moral beliefs.

In this context, legal moralism maintains that laws should reflect clear moral judgments, which reduces the room for subjective interpretation or the exercise of personal discretion by legal professionals. By prioritizing an objective moral framework above individual judgment, legal moralism promotes compliance with established legal norms as opposed to allowing discretion that could lead to varying interpretations or applications of the law.

The other philosophies, while addressing different aspects of law and its relationship to society, support various levels of discretion. Legal realism acknowledges the influence of societal factors on the law and often embraces discretion based on these real-world contexts. Natural law emphasizes inherent moral principles but may allow for interpretation in how those principles are applied within legal frameworks. Critical legal studies challenge traditional legal concepts and often advocate for flexibility and discretion in interpreting the law, recognizing the complexities of social power dynamics.