The paper reconstructs Luhmann’s conception of legal argumentation and justice especially focussing on the aspects of contingency and self-referring operative closure. The aim of his conception is to describe/explain in a disenchanted way --from an external, of “second order” point of view-- the work on adjudication, which, rather idealistically, lawyers and judges present as being a matter of reason. As a consequence of some surface similarities with Derrida’s deconstructive philosophy of justice, some propose to integrate the supposed reductive image of formal justice described by Luhmann with the ideal conception of justice presented by Derrida. Here this kind of attempt is rejected as epistemologically wrong. In addition, Luhmann’s theory is argued to have other shortcomings, namely: the failure to understand the pragmatic function of principles, and the incapacity to describe the current legal questions linked with cultures and legal pluralism, which characterise our society.
Legal Argumentation and Justice in Luhmann’s System Theory of Law / Belvisi, Francesco. - In: INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL FOR THE SEMIOTICS OF LAW. - ISSN 1572-8722. - ELETTRONICO. - 27:2(2014), pp. 341-357. [10.1007/s11196-014-9374-9]
Legal Argumentation and Justice in Luhmann’s System Theory of Law
BELVISI, Francesco
2014
Abstract
The paper reconstructs Luhmann’s conception of legal argumentation and justice especially focussing on the aspects of contingency and self-referring operative closure. The aim of his conception is to describe/explain in a disenchanted way --from an external, of “second order” point of view-- the work on adjudication, which, rather idealistically, lawyers and judges present as being a matter of reason. As a consequence of some surface similarities with Derrida’s deconstructive philosophy of justice, some propose to integrate the supposed reductive image of formal justice described by Luhmann with the ideal conception of justice presented by Derrida. Here this kind of attempt is rejected as epistemologically wrong. In addition, Luhmann’s theory is argued to have other shortcomings, namely: the failure to understand the pragmatic function of principles, and the incapacity to describe the current legal questions linked with cultures and legal pluralism, which characterise our society.File | Dimensione | Formato | |
---|---|---|---|
Belvisi su Luhmann IJSL 11196-014-9374-9.pdf
Accesso riservato
Descrizione: Articolo principale
Tipologia:
VOR - Versione pubblicata dall'editore
Dimensione
422.59 kB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
422.59 kB | Adobe PDF | Visualizza/Apri Richiedi una copia |
Pubblicazioni consigliate
I metadati presenti in IRIS UNIMORE sono rilasciati con licenza Creative Commons CC0 1.0 Universal, mentre i file delle pubblicazioni sono rilasciati con licenza Attribuzione 4.0 Internazionale (CC BY 4.0), salvo diversa indicazione.
In caso di violazione di copyright, contattare Supporto Iris