Roscoe Pound is widely regarded as the founder of Legal Functionalism, a school of legal thought that emphasizes the role of law in society and its functions.

Legal Functionalism focuses on the role of law in maintaining social order and achieving social goals, rather than on abstract principles of justice or morality.

Legal Functionalists argue that the primary function of law is to resolve disputes and maintain social harmony, rather than to punish criminals or promote economic growth.

Formalism, which emphasizes the importance of legal rules and procedures, is not a key concept in Legal Functionalism, which focuses on the role of law in achieving social goals.

Legal Functionalists argue that law is a product of society and reflects its values and needs, rather than being imposed from above or existing as an independent entity.

Legal Functionalism emphasizes a pragmatic approach to legal problems and achieving social goals, rather than strict adherence to legal rules and procedures.

Legal Functionalists argue that judges should interpret the law in light of social needs and values, rather than strictly following the letter of the law or creating new laws.

Legal Functionalism is often criticized for being too focused on social engineering and neglecting individual rights, as well as for being too vague and lacking clear principles. However, it is not typically criticized for being too conservative or resistant to change.

Oliver Wendell Holmes is associated with Legal Realism, not Legal Functionalism. Karl Llewellyn, Lon Fuller, and Benjamin Cardozo are all prominent Legal Functionalist scholars.

Legal Functionalism has influenced the development of other legal theories, such as Critical Legal Studies and Law and Economics, and has also been incorporated into legal education and practice.

Formalism, which emphasizes the importance of legal rules and procedures, is not a key concept in Legal Functionalism, which focuses on the role of law in achieving social goals.

Legal Functionalists argue that law is a product of society and reflects its values and needs, rather than being imposed from above or existing as an independent entity.

Legal Functionalism emphasizes a pragmatic approach to legal problems and achieving social goals, rather than strict adherence to legal rules and procedures.

Legal Functionalists argue that judges should interpret the law in light of social needs and values, rather than strictly following the letter of the law or creating new laws.

Legal Functionalism is often criticized for being too focused on social engineering and neglecting individual rights, as well as for being too vague and lacking clear principles. However, it is not typically criticized for being too conservative or resistant to change.

Oliver Wendell Holmes is associated with Legal Realism, not Legal Functionalism. Karl Llewellyn, Lon Fuller, and Benjamin Cardozo are all prominent Legal Functionalist scholars.

Legal Functionalism has influenced the development of other legal theories, such as Critical Legal Studies and Law and Economics, and has also been incorporated into legal education and practice.