The Amphianthropic Theory of Law

Legal theories examine validity, interpretation, proof, and institutional authority, yet legal reasoning can compress human circumstances into an isolated fact and treat the resulting decision as the end of inquiry. Developed from the Theory of Human Centrality (TCH), the Amphianthropic Theory of Law (ATL) proposes a six-stage architecture: Human Formation, Human Antecedence, Fact, Value, Norm/Decision, and Human Consequence. The latter may shape future human conditions, creating a recursive legal process. ATL preserves normative autonomy and makes external expertise conditional on relevance, reliability, materiality, necessity, and proportionality. This foundational manuscript compares major jurisprudential alternatives, examines judicial and legislative materials from eight countries, articulates five contestable hypotheses, and illustrates applications across ten legal fields. It further proposes three legally bounded analytical mechanisms: an audit of epistemic limits, a counterfactual test for materially omitted human dimensions, and a review of consequences where institutional competence permits continuing action. These mechanisms are situated against existing scholarship in legal epistemology, causal inference, and structural remedies rather than presented as discoveries without predecessors. Head-to-head conceptual comparisons identify possible incremental contributions, cases of doctrinal redundancy, negative controls, and conditions for empirical refutation. The manuscript does not report controlled experiments or claim demonstrated superiority over competing theories. Its contribution is a comparative research programme for evaluating whether a structured before-and-after analysis improves legally relevant understanding without sacrificing rights, institutional limits or proportionality.