Legal Studies 103: Theories of Law and Society – Spring 2018 Final Examination. Instructions: be sure to read all of the instructions carefully before beginning the exam. All of this information is critical to your performance and evaluation.
The exam is divided into 2 parts. In determining your grade on the final, Part One is worth 40% and Part Two is worth 60%.
By submitting your exam, you confirm that you have followed the campus rules defining and prohibiting academic cheating and plagiarism
In answering the 2 exam questions, please remember:
- Take time to plan and outline your answers.
- Provide general citations to the course materials you reference in your
answers (for example: Marx, Communist Manifesto, Part 1; Durkheim,
Division of Labor, Book 1 chapter 2).
- Be sure to allow enough time to review and edit your answers.
Part One: Weber (answer in 3-4 pages; normal font and margins)
According to Weber, which specific features and practices of modern law revealed the impacts of rationalization and bureaucracy?
Part Two: Comparative Question (answer in 4-5 pages: normal font and margins)
Which of the social theories you have considered this semester provides the most convincing account of the nature and features of modern law? Elucidate the theory and explain the reasons for your choice. In your answer, you might identify a single social theorist you find to be the most persuasive; or alternatively, identify elements of the work of some combination of theorists which you think taken together provide the most persuasive account.
Whatever approach you adopt, your answer needs to be comparative in its coverage and include a discussion of any three of the following theorists: Maine; Marx; Durkheim; and Weber. (You do not need to devote equal length and attention to each of the theorists you choose to discuss. But you should avoid a perfunctory discussion of any single reading.) In explaining which theory/theories you find most convincing, you might explain the defects or limitations you find in other theories.
Again, in explaining which theories/theories you find most convincing, you might explain the ways in which your preferred theory/theories covers themes and issues neglected or not adequately treated by other theorists