- About
-
The Global ETD Search service is a free service for researchers
to find electronic theses and dissertations. This service is
provided by the
Networked Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations.
Our metadata is collected from universities around the world. If you manage a university/consortium/country archive and want to be added, details can be found on the NDLTD website.
Search results
Showing 51 to 54 of 54 (0.095 seconds)Spelling suggestions: "subject:"sociological jurisprudence"" "subject:"ociological jurisprudence""
| 51 |
Das Verhältnis von moralischem Diskurs und rechtlichem Diskurs bei Jürgen Habermas /Huang, Chung-cheng. January 2007 (has links) (PDF)
Univ., Diss.--Heidelberg, 2006. / Literaturverz. S. [161] - 169.
|
| 52 |
Medienordnung und öffentlicher Diskurs : die Pflicht des Staates zur Gewährleistung der Funktionstüchtigkeit des öffentlichen Diskurses /Zentara, Kai Friedrich. January 1900 (has links)
Zugleich: Diss. Düsseldorf, 2008. / Literaturverz.
|
| 53 |
The Rise of transnational legal indicators: empirical accounts of law in a global societyRestrepo Amariles, David 19 June 2014 (has links)
Based on the premise ‘what we measure affects what we do’, this work seeks to address the following key question: What are the characteristics of the knowledge produced by the Rule of Law Index, WGI Rule of Law Indicator, Doing Business Indicators and the Global Competitiveness Index about the rule of law and business regulation respectively, and to what extent can this knowledge be used to assess and compare legal systems? My objective is to address the gap between, on the one hand, policy and scientific approaches to indicators and, on the other hand, legal scholarly approaches. The former tend to be specialized, mathematical and outcome-oriented, focusing on how to produce appropriate measures of social –and legal- phenomena. The latter assume an external point of view and are often verbal and critical. They focus generally on the genealogy, shortcomings and governance aspects of a particular set of indicators. This work provides new insights through a fourfold analysis: (i) an analysis of the context in which transnational legal indicators emerge, (ii) an analysis of their process of commensuration of legal phenomena, (iii) an analysis of their analytical value in jurisprudence and comparative legal studies, and (iv) an analysis of their normative effects on national legal systems. / Doctorat en Sciences juridiques / info:eu-repo/semantics/nonPublished
|
| 54 |
A Pragmatic Standard of Legal ValidityTyler, John 2012 May 1900 (has links)
American jurisprudence currently applies two incompatible validity standards to determine which laws are enforceable. The natural law tradition evaluates validity by an uncertain standard of divine law, and its methodology relies on contradictory views of human reason. Legal positivism, on the other hand, relies on a methodology that commits the analytic fallacy, separates law from its application, and produces an incomplete model of law.
These incompatible standards have created a schism in American jurisprudence that impairs the delivery of justice. This dissertation therefore formulates a new standard for legal validity. This new standard rejects the uncertainties and inconsistencies inherent in natural law theory. It also rejects the narrow linguistic methodology of legal positivism.
In their stead, this dissertation adopts a pragmatic methodology that develops a standard for legal validity based on actual legal experience. This approach focuses on the operations of law and its effects upon ongoing human activities, and it evaluates legal principles by applying the experimental method to the social consequences they produce. Because legal history provides a long record of past experimentation with legal principles, legal history is an essential feature of this method.
This new validity standard contains three principles. The principle of reason requires legal systems to respect every subject as a rational creature with a free will. The principle of reason also requires procedural due process to protect against the punishment of the innocent and the tyranny of the majority. Legal systems that respect their subjects' status as rational creatures with free wills permit their subjects to orient their own behavior. The principle of reason therefore requires substantive due process to ensure that laws provide dependable guideposts to individuals in orienting their behavior.
The principle of consent recognizes that the legitimacy of law derives from the consent of those subject to its power. Common law custom, the doctrine of stare decisis, and legislation sanctioned by the subjects' legitimate representatives all evidence consent.
The principle of autonomy establishes the authority of law. Laws must wield supremacy over political rulers, and political rulers must be subject to the same laws as other citizens. Political rulers may not arbitrarily alter the law to accord to their will.
Legal history demonstrates that, in the absence of a validity standard based on these principles, legal systems will not treat their subjects as ends in themselves. They will inevitably treat their subjects as mere means to other ends. Once laws do this, men have no rest from evil.
|
Page generated in 0.113 seconds