Summarize the views of the philosophers relating them to the concept and nature of law. What is law, in this philosopher's view? How does law function as a system?

Analyze the philosopher's views, discovering why they are logical or illogical, consistent or inconsistent, persuasive or unpersuasive. Matters that might be relevant to your analysis could include the manner in which the philosopher addresses the commonplaces of authority and common good or the philosophers' attempts to address inadequacies of earlier philosophies.

Criticize the philosopher's views, explaining why such views are logical or illogical, consistent or inconsistent, and persuasive or unpersuasive. Illustrate your criticisms with examples of situations or "clear cases" that demonstrate the philosophy's success or failure to satisfactorily account for the concept and nature of law

1. Length of the paper should be at least 1500 words, excluding cover page and references.
2. Viewpoint and purpose should be clearly established and sustained.
3. Assignment should follow the conventions of Standard American English (correct grammar, punctuation, etc.).
4. Writing should be well ordered, logical and unified, as well as original and insightful.
5. Your work should display superior content, organization, style, and mechanics.
6. Appropriate citation style should be followed
7. For Austin, Hart, Dworkin, Fuller and Aquinas, did you:
8. Summarize each philosopher's concept of law as a system?
   1. Describe a legal scenario illustrating the concept?
   2. Analyze how the philosopher's views relate to the competing theories of natural law and positive law?
   3. Evaluate how the philosopher's theory satisfies or does not satisfy the commonplaces of authority or common good?
9. Did you analyze and evaluate how Hart, Dworkin do or do not improve upon Austin's command theory?
10. Did you show internal citations in the body of the text as well as a proper list of references at the end of the paper, following APA style?