Law as Architecture: Mapping Contingency and Autonomy in Twentieth-Century Legal Historiography

Daniel Rohde, Nicolás Parra-Herrera
{"title":"Law as Architecture: Mapping Contingency and Autonomy in Twentieth-Century Legal Historiography","authors":"Daniel Rohde, Nicolás Parra-Herrera","doi":"10.5070/lp63361144","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":": This article addresses the power of law to make historical change. We begin by charting a rich debate on law’s autonomy held over the course of the twentieth century, overviewing contributions by Classical Legal Thought, Law and Society, Marxism, the New Left, Critical Legal History, and what we term the “ Millennial Consensus. ” We then sketch an alternative view that we feel is implicit in much legal history, where the law is seen as an “architecture”— a set of tools with which we build our society. On this view, law ’s autonomy lies in the way that it facilitates specific forms of societal ordering at the expense of others. We emphasize that it also has an existential dimension in that we can never foresee all the future uses particular legal institutions may be put to.","PeriodicalId":425370,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Law and Political Economy","volume":"572 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Law and Political Economy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5070/lp63361144","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

: This article addresses the power of law to make historical change. We begin by charting a rich debate on law’s autonomy held over the course of the twentieth century, overviewing contributions by Classical Legal Thought, Law and Society, Marxism, the New Left, Critical Legal History, and what we term the “ Millennial Consensus. ” We then sketch an alternative view that we feel is implicit in much legal history, where the law is seen as an “architecture”— a set of tools with which we build our society. On this view, law ’s autonomy lies in the way that it facilitates specific forms of societal ordering at the expense of others. We emphasize that it also has an existential dimension in that we can never foresee all the future uses particular legal institutions may be put to.
作为建筑的法律:映射20世纪法律史学中的偶然性和自主性
本文论述了法律的力量使历史发生变化。我们首先描绘了20世纪以来关于法律自治的丰富辩论,回顾了古典法律思想、法律与社会、马克思主义、新左派、批判法律史以及我们称之为“千年共识”的贡献。然后,我们勾勒出另一种观点,我们认为这种观点在很多法律史中都是隐含的,在法律史中,法律被视为一种“架构”——一套我们用来构建社会的工具。根据这种观点,法律的自主性在于它以牺牲他人利益为代价促进特定形式的社会秩序。我们强调,它还有一个存在的方面,因为我们永远无法预见特定法律机构将来可能使用的所有用途。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信