Two Worlds of Legal Scholarship and the Philosophy of Law

Author(s):  
Alexander Somek

2014 ◽  
Vol 26 (2) ◽  
pp. 340
Author(s):  
Danang Hardianto

This article is used to distinguish a deepest understanding between normative and empirical legal research. The jurisprudence is characteristically sui generis or ‘be on one’s own’, it contents norms and its scope, namely legal dogmatic, legal theory, and philosophy of law, is used to solve legal issues or problems.Otherwise the empirical science armed with its methodology,especially in connection with the sociology of law and called with the socio-legal research, describes merely the legal phenomena. Therefore, this article chiefly criticize the failing of the sociology of law to solve legal issues or problems for legal practice or legal scholarship. Artikel ini digunakan untuk membedakan sebuah pemahaman yang mendalam diantara penelitian hukum normatif dan empiris. Ilmu hukum bersifat sui generis atau hanya untuk jenisnya sendiri. Ilmu hukum mengandung  norma  dan  ruang  lingkupnya,  yaitu  dogmatik  hukum,  teori  hukum,  dan  filsafat  hukum, digunakan untuk memecahkan isu atau masalah hukum. Sebaliknya ilmu sosial, terkait dengan sosiologi hukum dan disebut dengan penelitian socio-legalhanya menggambarkan gejala-gejala hukum. Oleh karena itu, secara tegas artikel ini mengkritisi kegagalan sosiologi hukum untuk memecahkan isu atau masalah hukum baik untuk kebutuhan praktik maupun akademisi.





PsycCRITIQUES ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 61 (9) ◽  
Author(s):  
Patrick H. DeLeon ◽  
Jane J. Abanes




Author(s):  
Tyler Lohse

This essay comments on the nature of the language of the law and legal interpretation by exam- ining their effects on their recipients. Two forms of philosophy of law are examined, legal positiv- ism and teleological interpretive theory, which are then applied to their specific manifestations in literature and case law, both relating to antebellum slave law. In these cases, the slave sustains civil death under the law, permissible by means of these legal interpretive strategies.



2019 ◽  
Vol 105 (4) ◽  
pp. 508
Author(s):  
Yongliu Zheng




Information and telecommunication technologies have radically changed all social relations. This required corresponding changes in the information legislation. System of legal norms regulating information relations has been updated and increased. However, this changes did not improve legal regulation of information relations. Scientists emphasize that imperfection of information legislation depends on inadequacy of legal norms. Legal scholarship discover different defects of legal norms: antilogy, deficiency of law, inadequacy in logic, duplications and declarativity of norms. Legislation on information dissemination is also characterized by these defects. They entailed problems of application by the courts. Scientific immaturity of legal regulation of information relations is noted. The necessity for creating special legal act, which will regulate relations on information dissemination, is justified.



Cultura ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 23-28
Author(s):  
Luis CORDEIRO-RODRIGUES

Marxist Philosophy as an explanation of social reality has, since the fall of the Berlin Wall, been largely neglected. However, some philosophers have contended that it may still be relevant to explain today’s social reality. In this article, I wish to demonstrate precisely that Marxist philosophy can be relevant to understand social reality. To carry out this task, I show that Marxist philosophy of law can offer a sound explanation of Animal law in South Africa. My argument is that South African law is a superstructure that reinforces the power of the animal farming industry in South Africa. That is, the hidden purpose of the law is to benefit the industry. In order to argue for this, I present two sets of arguments. The first set argues that the law facilitates the functioning of the animal farming industry. In the second set of arguments I contend that the law socialises individuals into approving the methods of slaughtering by the animal farming industry.



Author(s):  
Вадим Леонидович Афанасьевский

В статье анализируется проблема взаимоотношений философии права и научной теории права. Рассматриваемая проблема стала особенно актуальной в российском образовательном пространстве в связи с введением после длительного перерыва в государственный образовательный стандарт магистратуры по юриспруденции учебной дисциплины «Философия права». Автор статьи в качестве базисного принимает тезис, согласно которому философия права, являясь сферой философской мысли, и теория права как область научного социогуманитарного знания представляют собой разные типы теоретического дискурса. Исходя из этого, в статье выстраивается теоретическая концепция, согласно которой задачей философии права как философского типа мышления является конструирование или экспликация онтологических, эпистемологических, аксиологических, феноменологических оснований для формирования и функционирования научных теоретико-правовых и историко-правовых построений. Для реализации поставленной в статье задачи подробно рассматриваются ключевые характеристики как теории философского типа, так и идеалов, норм и характеристик научного знания. Выявленное различие экстраполируется на взаимоотношение теории права как продукта научного творчества и философии права как конструкции, задающей базовые мировоззренческие смыслы. В качестве примера выработанных философией права и государства оснований научных теорий прогресса, государства, морали и права, автор приводит взгляды мыслителей западноевропейской философской классики: Т. Гоббса, Ж.-Ж. Руссо, И. Канта, Г.В.Ф. Гегеля. Именно их философские концепции предопределили образы теоретико- и историко-правовых учений XVIII, XIX, XX и даже начала XXI в. Таким образом, отношение философии права и теории права выстраивается по «вертикали»: от онтологического основания к возведению теоретико-правовых и историко-правовых научных построений. The article analyzes the problem of the relationship between the philosophy of law and the scientific theory of law. The problem under consideration has become especially urgent in the Russian educational space in connection with the introduction of the Philosophy of Law discipline master's degree in law after a long break. The author of the article takes as the basis the thesis that the philosophy of law, being the sphere of philosophical thought, and the theory of law as a field of scientific socio-humanitarian knowledge are different types of theoretical discourse. Based on this, the article builds a theoretical concept according to which the task of the philosophy of law as a philosophical type of thinking is the construction or explication of ontological, epistemological, axiological, phenomenological grounds for the formation and functioning of concrete scientific theoretical and legal and historical and legal constructions. To implement the task posed in the article, the key characteristics of both a theory of a philosophical type and ideals, norms and characteristics of scientific knowledge are examined in detail. The revealed difference is extrapolated to the relationship between the theory of law as a product of scientific creativity and the philosophy of law as a construction that sets basic philosophical meanings. As an example of the foundations of the scientific theories of progress, state, morality and law developed by the philosophy of law and the state, the author gives the views and thinkers of the West European philosophical classics T. Hobbes, J.-J. Russo, I. Kant, G.V.F. Hegel. It was their philosophical concepts that predetermined the images of theoretical and historical-legal doctrines of the XVIII, XIX, XX and even the beginning of the XXI centuries. Thus, the attitude of the philosophy of law and the theory of law is built along the «vertical»: from the ontological foundation to the construction of theoretical and historical and historical legal scientific constructions.



Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document