认识论他者:立法起草中知识的相互作用

IF 1.3 3区 社会学 Q1 LAW
KATI NIEMINEN, LAURA SARASOJA
{"title":"认识论他者:立法起草中知识的相互作用","authors":"KATI NIEMINEN,&nbsp;LAURA SARASOJA","doi":"10.1111/jols.12443","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>In this article, we use the concept of epistemic othering to describe the subjectivation of people who experience debt problems in the legislative drafting process, and argue that the evidence-based policy paradigm, together with its participatory dimension, produce a potentially harmful subject position for people who are considered vulnerable and irrational. By analysing the preparatory material of Finnish interest rate cap laws, we explore what is constructed as rational and possible in the legislative process, and how these modalities frame the use of expert knowledge. We argue that what is considered rational is constructed in terms of market logic, and what is construed as possible is heavily framed by law-as-knowledge. Together, market logic and law-as-knowledge form the preconditions for the use of expert knowledge. Ultimately, the way in which these three types of knowledge interact contributes to the epistemic othering of people who experience debt problems.</p>","PeriodicalId":51544,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Law and Society","volume":"50 3","pages":"322-343"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jols.12443","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Epistemic othering: the interplay of knowledges in legislative drafting\",\"authors\":\"KATI NIEMINEN,&nbsp;LAURA SARASOJA\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/jols.12443\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>In this article, we use the concept of epistemic othering to describe the subjectivation of people who experience debt problems in the legislative drafting process, and argue that the evidence-based policy paradigm, together with its participatory dimension, produce a potentially harmful subject position for people who are considered vulnerable and irrational. By analysing the preparatory material of Finnish interest rate cap laws, we explore what is constructed as rational and possible in the legislative process, and how these modalities frame the use of expert knowledge. We argue that what is considered rational is constructed in terms of market logic, and what is construed as possible is heavily framed by law-as-knowledge. Together, market logic and law-as-knowledge form the preconditions for the use of expert knowledge. Ultimately, the way in which these three types of knowledge interact contributes to the epistemic othering of people who experience debt problems.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51544,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Law and Society\",\"volume\":\"50 3\",\"pages\":\"322-343\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jols.12443\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Law and Society\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jols.12443\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Law and Society","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jols.12443","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在这篇文章中,我们使用认知他人的概念来描述在立法起草过程中遇到债务问题的人的主观化,并认为基于证据的政策范式及其参与维度,对那些被认为是脆弱和非理性的人产生了潜在的有害主体地位。通过分析芬兰利率上限法的准备材料,我们探讨了在立法过程中什么是合理和可能的,以及这些模式如何构成专家知识的使用框架。我们认为,被认为合理的东西是根据市场逻辑构建的,而被解释为可能的东西在很大程度上被法律框定为知识。市场逻辑和作为知识的法律共同构成了使用专家知识的前提条件。最终,这三种类型的知识相互作用的方式有助于经历债务问题的人的认识他人。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Epistemic othering: the interplay of knowledges in legislative drafting

Epistemic othering: the interplay of knowledges in legislative drafting

In this article, we use the concept of epistemic othering to describe the subjectivation of people who experience debt problems in the legislative drafting process, and argue that the evidence-based policy paradigm, together with its participatory dimension, produce a potentially harmful subject position for people who are considered vulnerable and irrational. By analysing the preparatory material of Finnish interest rate cap laws, we explore what is constructed as rational and possible in the legislative process, and how these modalities frame the use of expert knowledge. We argue that what is considered rational is constructed in terms of market logic, and what is construed as possible is heavily framed by law-as-knowledge. Together, market logic and law-as-knowledge form the preconditions for the use of expert knowledge. Ultimately, the way in which these three types of knowledge interact contributes to the epistemic othering of people who experience debt problems.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
15.40%
发文量
59
期刊介绍: Established as the leading British periodical for Socio-Legal Studies The Journal of Law and Society offers an interdisciplinary approach. It is committed to achieving a broad international appeal, attracting contributions and addressing issues from a range of legal cultures, as well as theoretical concerns of cross- cultural interest. It produces an annual special issue, which is also published in book form. It has a widely respected Book Review section and is cited all over the world. Challenging, authoritative and topical, the journal appeals to legal researchers and practitioners as well as sociologists, criminologists and other social scientists.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信