[3][4] The ultimate goal of legal formalism would be to describe the underlying principles in a single and determinate system that could be applied mechanically—from which the term "mechanical jurisprudence" comes.
[7] Formalism sees adjudication as the uncontroversial application of accepted principles to known facts to derive the outcome in the manner of a deductive syllogism.
[11][12] Formalism has been called an "autonomous discipline,"[13] in reference to the formalist belief that judges require only the facts and the law, all normative issues such as morality or politics being irrelevant.
"[16] Formalism seeks to maintain that separation as a "theory that law is a set of rules and principles independent of other political and social institutions.
[19] Instrumentalism is the view that creativity in the interpretation of legal texts is justified to ensure that the law serves good public policy and social interests, including the promotion of justice and the protection of human rights.
He reviews Jørgensen's paradox to introduce deontic logic, and acknowledges this innovation by Georg Henrik von Wright.