| 1. |
- Baier, Matthias, et al.
(författare)
-
Introduction
- 2013
-
Ingår i: Social and Legal Norms. Towards a Socio-legal Understanding of Normativity. - 9781409453437
-
Bokkapitel (refereegranskat)
|
|
| 2. |
- Baier, Matthias, et al.
(författare)
-
Relations between social and legal norms
- 2013
-
Ingår i: Social and Legal Norms. Towards a Socio-legal Understanding of Normativity. - 9781409453437 ; , s. 53-70
-
Bokkapitel (refereegranskat)
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
- Banakar, Reza, et al.
(författare)
-
Can Legal Sociology Account for the Normativity of Law?
- 2013
-
Ingår i: Social and Legal Norms. - 9781409453437 ; , s. 15-38
-
Bokkapitel (refereegranskat)abstract
- This paper challenges the assumption that legal sociology should apply itself to the external or factual properties of the law and leave the internal and normative aspects of legal phenomena to doctrinal scholars and moral philosophers. It argues that legal sociology explores the normative contexts of the law and other social systems, but being restricted by its “scientific” mode of expression it describes and analyses them in sociological rather than moral terms. Legal sociology is, and should be seen as, a different language game than moral and legal philosophy, and its treatment of normativity should be understood on its own terms. The assertion that legal sociology should limit its scope of analysis to the study of the empirical aspects of law and leave the study of law’s normative dimensions to other branches of legal studies is itself a normative supposition and part of the competing discourses which constitute the field of legal research. These discourses aim at demarcating the disciplinary boundaries between various epistemic approaches to the study of law and creating disciplinary identities rather than exploring the methodological scope of socio-legal research. Part One starts by briefly considering the relationship between norms and normativity, arguing that normativity is generated by system as well as lifeworld and is not necessarily reducible to the effects or functions of individual norms. Part Two develops this point by making a case for justice as law’s source of normativity par excellence. It maintains that although the relationship between law and justice is often discussed in terms of norms, the normativity that justice exercises on law is dependent on the broader context of the legal system, which is defined differently by different theories. Part Three draws attention to the methodological constraints of socio-legal research, according to which social scientific studies of law should apply themselves to the external empirical or factual properties of the relationship between law and society and leave the internal and normative matters to doctrinal scholars and moral philosophers, respectively. The paper concludes by arguing that the sphere of socio-legal research is not, and cannot be, limited to an examination of the factual characteristics of law. Moreover, the assertion that legal sociology should apply itself to the study of the empirical aspects of law and leave the normative dimensions to other legal scholars is a normative stance and part of on-going attempts at demarcating the disciplinary boundaries of various branches of legal studies.
|
|
| 5. |
- Dahlstrand, Karl, et al.
(författare)
-
Norms in Perspective: Norms about norms - a Hartian perspective
- 2013
-
Ingår i: Social and Legal Norms. - 9781409453437 ; , s. 89-105
-
Bokkapitel (refereegranskat)abstract
- My purpose in this article is to make a contribution to what the legal philosopher H.L.A. Hart (1907-1992) has to say about providing a sociological understanding of law and to apply Hart's theory in relation to a specific area of law. The specific legal area consists of the violation compensation that victims of crime can obtain from the Crime Victim Compensation and Support Authority in Sweden. The ambition in the following article is to relate Hart’s theory to other theories that are usually of interest in Sociology of Law, in particular the relationship between legal and social norms in general, in order to stress the social and cultural basis of law (Cotterrell 1992, Tuori, 2002), rather than to embellish Hart’s theory at such. For Hart, one of the most significant contemporary legal positivists with high relevance for socio-legal research, law is ultimately the outcome of institutional activity resulting from the individual and which law “officials” recognize as legally valid (Galligan 2007: 7, Friedrichs 2006: 95). Hart's main contribution is that he stratifies legal rules into primary rules, mostly concerning orders and prohibitions, or rules of behaviour, and indirect secondary rules, specifying the criteria for legal validity and governing the use of the primary rules. The principal of the secondary rules is labelled the rule of recognition that determines which norms belong to – or do not belong to – a particular legal system. The recognition rule is therefore akin to a potent meta-norm and its existence and authority is, for Hart, an open empirical issue about sociological facts regarding the social pressure among other things (Hart 1997: 94, 292).
|
|
| 6. |
- De Kaminski, Marcin, et al.
(författare)
-
Studying Norms and Social Change in a Digital Age: Identifying and Understanding a Multidimensional Gap Problem
- 2013
-
Ingår i: Social and Legal Norms: Towards a Socio-legal Understanding of Normativity. - 9781409453437 ; , s. 309-330
-
Bokkapitel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The fact that the debate concerning copyright in a digital society has been both intense and filled with polemic conflicts ever since the late 1990s makes it clear that it is a most complicated issue to solve, or even grasp. Basically, both the legal and societal discussion and development are explicitly dependent on a greater understanding of the on-going processes surrounding copyright. This presents a well-suited point of departure for research such as the one conducted within the Cybernorms research group – both in terms of providing valuable insights into the field of sociology of law when it comes to understanding how to relate to the framework provided by digitalization in general and the Internet in particular, and in terms of providing more accurate knowledge and toolsets to legislators in related fields.
|
|
| 7. |
- De Kaminsky, Marcin, et al.
(författare)
-
Studying norms and social change in a digital age : identifying and understanding a multidimensional gap problem
- 2013
-
Ingår i: Social and legal norms. - : Ashgate. - 9781409453437 - 9781409453444 ; , s. 309-330
-
Bokkapitel (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- The fact that the debate concerning copyright in a digital society has been both intense and filled with polemic conflicts ever since the late 1990s makes it clear that it is a most complicated issue to solve, or even grasp. Basically, both the legal and societal discussion and development are explicitly dependent on a greater understanding of the on-going processes surrounding copyright. This presents a well-suited point of departure for research such as the one conducted within the Cybernorms research group – both in terms of providing valuable insights into the field of sociology of law when it comes to understanding how to relate to the framework provided by digitalization in general and the Internet in particular, and in terms of providing more accurate knowledge and toolsets to legislators in related fields
|
|
| 8. |
|
|
| 9. |
|
|
| 10. |
- Larsson, Stefan, et al.
(författare)
-
Conceptions, Categories, and Embodiment: Why Metaphors are of Fundamental Importance for Understanding Norms
- 2013
-
Ingår i: Social and Legal Norms: towards a socio-legal understanding of normativity. - 9781409453437 ; , s. 121-139
-
Bokkapitel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The propositions in this chapter are to a large extent drawn from the thesis Metaphors and norms – understanding copyright law in a digital society (Larsson 2011b), however with some important complements, not least concerning the implications of categorisation. The chapter is explorative in bringing findings from cognitive linguistics into the quite common socio-legal task of studying norms. Its aim is not to debunk, but to assemble. The promise of cognitive theory is here found in its ability to make explicit the unconscious and cognitive operations that structure our conceptions of reality. Emphasis is put on the importance of understanding how language, meaning and thought are connected. A main advantage of the metaphor-theoretical connection to general norm analysis lies in how language-based expressions and metaphors relate to the mind, how our thoughts are framed and thereby both controlled and enabled by how different conceptions are constructing metaphors. This goes for the most mundane and everyday events as well as law. This perspective indicates the significance of detailed studies of the surface structures, which have the potential to reveal underlying conceptions that may control a legal or social norm (Larsson, 2011b; Larsson and Hydén 2010). Cognitive linguistics is here argued to be of significance to norm studies. The important findings not only take into account the fact that metaphors play a much more fundamental role in thought and language than is traditionally acknowledged in theory of law. The findings of importance concern how categorisation is (really) done, the case of prototype effects (some members of a category are regarded as more “true” representatives of that category than other members of the same category), and the framing aspects of conceptions and metaphors. This is further emphasised by the process of embodiment of metaphors, and, hence, law. In simple terms, law is in need of a reification in order to be talked and thought about. This process is therefore of great interest for anyone concerned with understanding law’s place in society as a cognitive, lingual and cultural artefact. This chapter considers all of these contributions from cognitive linguistics to see what may benefit the study of norms in Sociology of Law.
|
|
