A question on Jurisprudence (Legal Theory) here
has been closed apparently because the question is not considered to be specific enough.
The answer here
confirms that questions on Jurisprudence are within the scope of Law SE.
Law Stack Exchange is not a general discussion forum but I wonder whether too high a bar is being set for questions on Jurisprudence and the like. Such questions will almost inevitably be less precise than a question on substantive law.
We are unlikely to get a question like:
"Is is a fair criticism of the Command Theory of Law that, whilst it has some explanatory power in relation to criminal law, its description of contract law is artificial as nobody is commanded to contract."
because someone who formulates such a question will probably be able to answer it themselves.
I think "what criticisms are made of the Command Theory of Law" should be accepted as a question.
Update The question is now showing that it has been closed because it it is opinion based but isn't all law (in Common Law systems at least) ultimately opinion based? How can you understand a judgment of an appellate court without considering opinions? How can you study Legal Theory without considering the various theories?