书评:现代欧洲比较法的范式。一段历史

IF 1.4 2区社会学 Q2 CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY

Social & Legal Studies Pub Date : 2022-01-11 DOI:10.1177/09646639211072215

Luca Siliquini-Cinelli

{"title":"书评:现代欧洲比较法的范式。一段历史","authors":"Luca Siliquini-Cinelli","doi":"10.1177/09646639211072215","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Apparent certainties are no longer taken for granted, if not heavily criticized. These certainties include the acceptance of the “ functional method ” as the only or at least predominant method for comparative research, the “ country and Western ” approach, which leaves aside non-State legal systems and non-Western legal cultures, the idea that comparative research would consist in simply describing (aspects of) two or more legal systems, a uniquely doctrinal approach with little attention to law ’ s context, and a more or less ﬁ xed taxonomy of “ legal families ” . They have been replaced by a more scholarly approach to comparative law, starting from research questions and hypotheses, using methods, including those from the social sciences, which seem appropriate to ﬁ nd answers to those research questions and to test the hypotheses. This new approach is clearly characterized by pluralism - pluralism as to the kinds of legal systems compared (not just State law) and a methodological pluralism. 1","PeriodicalId":47163,"journal":{"name":"Social & Legal Studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Book Review: Paradigms in Modern European Comparative Law. A History\",\"authors\":\"Luca Siliquini-Cinelli\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/09646639211072215\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Apparent certainties are no longer taken for granted, if not heavily criticized. These certainties include the acceptance of the “ functional method ” as the only or at least predominant method for comparative research, the “ country and Western ” approach, which leaves aside non-State legal systems and non-Western legal cultures, the idea that comparative research would consist in simply describing (aspects of) two or more legal systems, a uniquely doctrinal approach with little attention to law ’ s context, and a more or less ﬁ xed taxonomy of “ legal families ” . They have been replaced by a more scholarly approach to comparative law, starting from research questions and hypotheses, using methods, including those from the social sciences, which seem appropriate to ﬁ nd answers to those research questions and to test the hypotheses. This new approach is clearly characterized by pluralism - pluralism as to the kinds of legal systems compared (not just State law) and a methodological pluralism. 1\",\"PeriodicalId\":47163,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Social & Legal Studies\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Social & Legal Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/09646639211072215\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social & Legal Studies","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09646639211072215","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

摘要

表面上的确定性不再被视为理所当然，如果不是受到严厉批评的话。这些确定性的验收包括“功能法”作为唯一或至少主要比较研究的方法,“乡村音乐和西部”的方法,这让一旁非国家法律体系和非西方的法律文化,认为比较简单描述(方面)的研究将包括两个或两个以上的法律体系,独特的理论方法对法律的年代背景下,或多或少和fi xed“法律家庭”的分类。它们已被一种更为学术化的比较法方法所取代，这种方法从研究问题和假设出发，使用包括社会科学在内的方法，这些方法似乎适合寻找这些研究问题的答案并检验这些假设。这种新办法的明显特点是多元主义- -就所比较的各种法律制度而言的多元主义(不仅仅是国家法律)和方法论的多元主义。1

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

Book Review: Paradigms in Modern European Comparative Law. A History

Apparent certainties are no longer taken for granted, if not heavily criticized. These certainties include the acceptance of the “ functional method ” as the only or at least predominant method for comparative research, the “ country and Western ” approach, which leaves aside non-State legal systems and non-Western legal cultures, the idea that comparative research would consist in simply describing (aspects of) two or more legal systems, a uniquely doctrinal approach with little attention to law ’ s context, and a more or less ﬁ xed taxonomy of “ legal families ” . They have been replaced by a more scholarly approach to comparative law, starting from research questions and hypotheses, using methods, including those from the social sciences, which seem appropriate to ﬁ nd answers to those research questions and to test the hypotheses. This new approach is clearly characterized by pluralism - pluralism as to the kinds of legal systems compared (not just State law) and a methodological pluralism. 1

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

Social & Legal Studies Multiple-

CiteScore

3.30

自引率

0.00%

发文量

期刊介绍： SOCIAL & LEGAL STUDIES was founded in 1992 to develop progressive, interdisciplinary and critical approaches towards socio-legal study. At the heart of the journal has been a commitment towards feminist, post-colonialist, and socialist economic perspectives on law. These remain core animating principles. We aim to create an intellectual space where diverse traditions and critical approaches within legal study meet. We particularly welcome work in new fields of socio-legal study, as well as non-Western scholarship.