Abstract: In spite of their reasonable aspects, both of the backward-looking judicial mode of positivism and forward-looking judicial mode of pragmatism are biased. The judicial judgments of conciliationism fail to establish consistency between the past and the future either. Since its request to law is explainable judgments, Dworkin’s holistic theory of judiciary combines retrospective factors and prospective ones. Holistic judiciary defines contemporary law practice as an evolving political narration. Therefore it provides a coherent judicial model. However, being out of tune with the pluralistic moralities in modern society, Dworkin's holistic coherentism is subject to the attacks of Raz’s partial coherentism.