Humanistic Logic Theory: Reconciling Legal Certainty and Substantive Justice in Contemporary Legal Reasoning
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.63120/islamiclegalissue.v2i1.106Keywords:
Humanistic Logic, Legal Justice, Legal SystemAbstract
The persistent tension between legal certainty and substantive justice reveals a fundamental limitation in legal reasoning: humanitarian values are often treated as external moral considerations rather than constitutive elements of legal rationality. This study develops Humanistic Logic Theory as a jurisprudential framework integrating logical coherence, legal justification, human dignity, vulnerability, proportionality, and substantive consequences within a unified structure of legal reasoning. Employing normative-conceptual legal research, the study combines conceptual, comparative, and hermeneutic-philosophical approaches to synthesize major traditions of legal thought, including Aristotle, Radbruch, Rawls, Dworkin, Alexy, Sen, and contemporary dignity-based jurisprudence. The analysis formulates four interrelated dimensions: Humanistic Logic, Legal Rationality, Humanity-Based Justice, and Ethical Equilibrium. The findings show that legally valid reasoning remains normatively incomplete when it disregards disproportionate human consequences, while humanitarian considerations require rational and doctrinal justification to avoid arbitrariness. An illustrative humanitarian-legal conflict further demonstrates how the framework makes tensions among legality, vulnerability, institutional responsibility, and substantive justice analytically visible. The principal theoretical contribution lies not in introducing entirely new legal values, but in reconstructing their relationship by positioning humanity as an internal criterion of rational legal justification. The framework also has potential relevance beyond domestic adjudication, particularly for global legal challenges involving human rights, socio-economic inequality, migration, public health, and technology-mediated governance in contemporary plural legal systems. Although its evaluative indicators remain normative-analytical and require empirical and cross-jurisdictional validation, Humanistic Logic Theory offers a transferable architecture for advancing legal reasoning from formal rationality toward human-centered rationality without abandoning legal certainty or the rule of law.
Downloads
References
Alexy, R. (2014). Formal principles: Some replies to critics. International Journal of Constitutional Law, 12(3), 511–524. https://doi.org/10.1093/icon/mou051
Anosike, W. (2026). Philosophy and Legal Reasoning. In Rethinking Philosophy for Education, Society and Human Development in Sub-Saharan Africa (pp. 89–97). https://doi.org/10.1108/978-1-80592-531-620251008
Aristotle. (1999). Nicomachean Ethics A4 - Irwin, Terence (2nd ed.). Hackett Publishing Company.
Arnold, S. (2022). The Chain Novel and Its Normative Fine Structure in Civil Law and Common Law: Dworkin, Brandom and Law’s Normativity. In Law and Philosophy Library (Vol. 139, pp. 29–49). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-87718-7_4
Asada, M. (2019). Definition and legal justification of sanctions. In Economic Sanctions in International Law and Practice (pp. 3–23). https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429052989-1
Babu, C. V. S., Hariharan, V., Surag, B. R. M., & Gayathri, R. R. (2026). Ethics by Design: Legal and Moral Foundations for Agentic AI in Autonomous Vehicles. In Agentic AI for Autonomous Vehicles: Safety, Reliability, Law, and Ethics (pp. 259–286). https://doi.org/10.4018/979-8-3373-7355-3.ch009
Balasubramaniam, R. R. (2021). The Conceptual Case for Law as Integrity in Malaysia. In Palgrave Studies in Classical Liberalism: Part F5513 (pp. 31–71). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-79537-5_2
Barak, A., & Kalir, D. (2012). Proportionality: Constitutional rights and their limitations. In Proportionality: Constitutional Rights and their Limitations. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139035293
Baudoin, M.-É. (2024). The Polysemy of the Concept of Human Dignity in the Jurisprudence of European Constitutional Courts: A Potential Threat to Human Rights Protection? International and Comparative Law Review, 24(1), 120–138. https://doi.org/10.2478/iclr-2024-0008
Brownsword, R. (2015). Human dignity from a legal perspective. In The Cambridge Handbook of Human Dignity: Interdisciplinary Perspectives (pp. 1–22). https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511979033.003
Bueno, E. D. P., & Silva, E. M. D. Da. (2022). An International Legal Perspective on Human Dignity: The Extrinsic Recognition of an Intrinsic Condition. Canadian Yearbook of International Law, 59, 313–340. https://doi.org/10.1017/cyl.2022.23
Bui, D. T., & Nguyen, T.-D. (2025). The inadvertent migration of proportionality and the role of Ex-Ante constitutional review in the Vietnamese lawmaking process. Theory and Practice of Legislation, 13(1), 1–30. https://doi.org/10.1080/20508840.2024.2399481
Burlaka, O., Churpita, H., Romanchenko, E., Bilianska, N., Senyk, S., & Lymar, Y. (2024). Social and Humanistic Nature of Justice in Civil Cases. Archives Des Sciences, 74(4), 100–104. https://doi.org/10.62227/as/74414
Caniago, H. (2026). Sidang kasus penjualan wifi Starlink untuk warga Mentawai, terdakwa dinyatakan bersalah tapi tak dipenjara. BBC News Indonesia. https://www.bbc.com/indonesia/articles/cmvgy4zn8zxyo
Catanzariti, M. (2022). The juridification of vulnerability in the European legal culture. Onati Socio-Legal Series, 12(6), 1391–1416. https://doi.org/10.35295/OSLS.IISL/0000-0000-0000-1314
Cerar, M. (2023). Ethical Perspective of The Future Development of Law. Medicine, Law and Society, 16(2), 247–266. https://doi.org/10.18690/mls.16.2.247-266.2023
Červínek, Z. (2020). Alexy’s Theory of Proportionality: Critical Reflection. Pravnik, 159(12), 925–926. https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85168380944?origin=resultslist
Chen, X. (2023). Humanistic Foundation of Criminal Law. In Humanistic Foundation of Criminal Law. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-9764-8
Chen, X. (2026). Learning ethical sensitivity through authentic legal experience: an educational psychology perspective on court hearing engagement. Frontiers in Psychology, 17. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2026.1796884
Comella, V. F. (2025). Beyond the principle of proportionality. In Comparative Constitutional Theory, Second Edition (pp. 312–330). https://doi.org/10.4337/9781035306411.00021
Czepek, J. J. (2024). Dignity in the Jurisprudence of European Court of Human Rights. International and Comparative Law Review, 24(1), 107–119. https://doi.org/10.2478/iclr-2024-0007
Diz, F. M. (2025). Procedural Protection of Vulnerable Persons: Fitting The Judicial Process. Teoria y Derecho, (39), 44–69. https://doi.org/10.36151/TD.2025.131
Dworkin, R. (1986). Law’s Empire. Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
Feteris, E. T. (2017a). Habermas’s discourse theory and the rationality of legal discourse. In Argumentation Library (Vol. 1, pp. 77–93). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-024-1129-4_5
Feteris, E. T. (2017b). The logical approach of legal argumentation. In Argumentation Library (Vol. 1, pp. 23–47). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-024-1129-4_2
Flores, Á. O. R. (2021). The different types of conceptual analysis and its applications in legal theory. Toward metodological integration. Problema, (15), 549–574. https://doi.org/10.22201/IIJ.24487937E.2021.15.16132
Friedman, L. M. (2005). Coming Age: Law and Society Enters an Exclusive Club. In Annual Review Law Social Science.
Garcés-Velástegui, P. (2022). Modelling Amartya Sen’s Capability Approach: An Interdisciplinary and Contemporary Account. Philosophical Readings, 14(2), 85–93. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7030271
Gasiokwu, P. I., Esavwede, J. P., Aloamaka, P. C., & Iheanacho, L. (2024). Critical Examination of Emerging Issues in Refugee Protection: A Transnational Legal Perspective. Jurnal IUS Kajian Hukum Dan Keadilan, 12(2), 423–446. https://doi.org/10.29303/ius.v12i2.1364
Gruodyte, E., & Orlauskas, K. (2024). Proportionality of the Application of Criminal Liability for Gifts in the Healthcare System of Lithuania: Alternatives for Effective Corruption Prevention. International and Comparative Law Review, 24(2), 185–201. https://doi.org/10.2478/iclr-2024-0024
Hariyanti, T. (2013). The Contribution of Literature in the Humanization of the Law in Indonesia. Humaniora, 25(2), 117–128. https://journal.ugm.ac.id/jurnal-humaniora/article/view/2355
Havlíček, T. (2025). Epistemology of equilibrium. In Research Handbook on Epistemologies of Law (pp. 118–130). https://doi.org/10.4337/9781035348008.00017
Havlíková, B. (2024). The Influence of New Technologies on The Concept of Human Dignity in European Law. Lawyer Quarterly, 14(1), 101–110. https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85188705156?origin=resultslist
Jansen, N. (2024). The Awakening of Legal Modernity? Renaissance Humanism and 16th-Century Jurisprudence. Zeitschrift Der Savigny-Stiftung Fur Rechtsgeschichte, Germanistische Abteilung, 141(1), 189–246. https://doi.org/10.1515/zrgg-2024-0005
Jellamo, A. (2019). Observations on Legality and Justice. Kant, Kelsen, Radbruch. Rivista Di Filosofia Del Diritto, 8(2), 401–418. https://doi.org/10.4477/95068
Kaur, G. (2025). Justice in the Digital Age: Popular Culture and the Rise of AI- Powered Legal Decision- Making. In Artificial Intelligence for Legal System: Jurisprudence in the Digital Age (pp. 148–165). https://doi.org/10.1201/9781003491903-12
Manhas, N. S., Sharma, N., & Tomer, A. (2026). A World of Rights: Navigating the Global Landscape of Human Rights. In A World of Rights: Navigating the Global Landscape of Human Rights. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003787594
Neuhäuser, C., & Stoecker, R. (2015). Human dignity as universal nobility. In The Cambridge Handbook of Human Dignity: Interdisciplinary Perspectives (pp. 298–309). https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511979033.036
Nonet, P., & Selznick, P. (2017). Responsive Law. In Law & Society in Transition (pp. 73–114). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203787540-4
Paolis, E. De. (2025). The sanctioning discretion on the test case of continuing offence: between innovative approaches and traditional resistance. Archivio Penale, 2025-Septe(3). https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/105025670290?origin=resultslist
Pin, A. (2025). Dignity in Judgment: Constitutional Adjudication in Comparative Perspective. In Dignity in Judgment: Constitutional Adjudication in Comparative Perspective. https://doi.org/10.1093/9780198922469.001.0001
Radbruch, G. (2006). Statutory Lawlessness and Supra-Statutory Law (1946). Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, 26(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1093/ojls/gqi041
Rawls, J. (2001). Justice as Fairness: A Restatement. Harvard University Press.
Sáenz, M. J. (2019). Reconsidering empathy in the “law and Literature” movement. Revista Derecho Del Estado, (43), 351–372. https://doi.org/10.18601/01229893.n43.13
Sen, A. (2009). The idea of justice. Harvard University Press.
Sieckmann, J. (2018). Proportionality as a universal human rights principle. In Proportionality in Law: An Analytical Perspective (pp. 3–24). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-89647-2_1
Silalahi, A. D. (2025). Criticising The Political System and The Normativity Foundations through Joseph Raz’s Legal and Philosophical Thought. Mimbar Hukum, 37(1), 55–82. https://doi.org/10.22146/mh.v37i1.20234
Sitepu, R. I., Wulansari, C. D., & Sitepu, A. E. S. B. (2026). AI and Judicial Decision-Making: A Systematic Review of Applications and Ethical Consideration. AIP Conference Proceedings, 3432(1). https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0331343
Stępień, M. (2025). Judges and the struggle to understand empathy. In Judges, Decision Making and Empathy: Insights from the Bench (pp. 52–71). https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003546580-4
Stępień, M., & Rużyczka, E. W. (2025). Judges, Decision Making and Empathy: Insights from the Bench. In Judges, Decision Making and Empathy: Insights from the Bench. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003546580
Sunaryo. (2022). John Rawls’s Concept of Fairness, Criticism and Relevance. Jurnal Konstitusi, 19(1), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.31078/jk1911
Tolkachev, K. B. (2023). Humanistic Principles in Russian and Foreign Constitutional Law. Gosudarstvo i Pravo, 2023(12), 59–65. https://doi.org/10.31857/S102694520029291-1
Tukhvatulina, L. A., & Krzhevov, V. S. (2019). Rationality as a fundamental notion of legal philosophy: On the letter and the spirit of law. Voprosy Filosofii, (1), 26–30. https://doi.org/10.31857/S004287440003614-0
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Aris Prio Agus Santoso, Ramlin Ahmad
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.