Philosophical Questions at the Empirical Turn

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearch

Standard

Philosophical Questions at the Empirical Turn. / Holtermann, Jakob v. H.

In: European Journal of Legal Studies, 02.2019.

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearch

Harvard

Holtermann, JVH 2019, 'Philosophical Questions at the Empirical Turn', European Journal of Legal Studies.

APA

Holtermann, J. V. H. (2019). Philosophical Questions at the Empirical Turn. European Journal of Legal Studies.

Vancouver

Holtermann JVH. Philosophical Questions at the Empirical Turn. European Journal of Legal Studies. 2019 Feb.

Author

Holtermann, Jakob v. H. / Philosophical Questions at the Empirical Turn. In: European Journal of Legal Studies. 2019.

Bibtex

@article{e45d904c5fb4448ebbab0337ab660328,
title = "Philosophical Questions at the Empirical Turn",
abstract = "Adopting a meta-perspective, this contribution focuses on the ongoing empirical turn in legal scholarship as such. A recurrent issue of controversy and (self-) doubts has to do with understanding the intricate relationship between empirical findings and more traditional doctrinal approaches to law. This discussion centers on the following line of questions: i) In what sense do empirical studies form part of a legal science? ii) Why, if at all, should they be pursued at a law faculty? iii) What do empirical studies tell us about valid law? iv) What do they tell us about what obligations and rights people have? v) How do empirical findings relate to the kind of knowledge traditionally sought in the doctrinal study of law? Rather than attempting to give an answer to these questions, this contribution suggests a taxonomical framework within which discussion about them ought to take place. Based on an analysis of the different stances taken by prominent theorists on the relation between traditional doctrinal work and empirical work in the legal field, the author suggests that we should distinguish between the following three attitudes on the relation between traditional legal doctrinal studies and empirical studies of law: toleration, replacement, and synthesis.",
keywords = "The Faculty of Law, empiriske studier af retten, retsfilosofi, den empiriske vending, empirical studies of law, epistemology of law, international legal theory, The empirical turn",
author = "Holtermann, {Jakob v. H.}",
year = "2019",
month = "2",
language = "English",
journal = "European Journal of Legal Studies",
issn = "1973-2937",
publisher = "European University Institute",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Philosophical Questions at the Empirical Turn

AU - Holtermann, Jakob v. H.

PY - 2019/2

Y1 - 2019/2

N2 - Adopting a meta-perspective, this contribution focuses on the ongoing empirical turn in legal scholarship as such. A recurrent issue of controversy and (self-) doubts has to do with understanding the intricate relationship between empirical findings and more traditional doctrinal approaches to law. This discussion centers on the following line of questions: i) In what sense do empirical studies form part of a legal science? ii) Why, if at all, should they be pursued at a law faculty? iii) What do empirical studies tell us about valid law? iv) What do they tell us about what obligations and rights people have? v) How do empirical findings relate to the kind of knowledge traditionally sought in the doctrinal study of law? Rather than attempting to give an answer to these questions, this contribution suggests a taxonomical framework within which discussion about them ought to take place. Based on an analysis of the different stances taken by prominent theorists on the relation between traditional doctrinal work and empirical work in the legal field, the author suggests that we should distinguish between the following three attitudes on the relation between traditional legal doctrinal studies and empirical studies of law: toleration, replacement, and synthesis.

AB - Adopting a meta-perspective, this contribution focuses on the ongoing empirical turn in legal scholarship as such. A recurrent issue of controversy and (self-) doubts has to do with understanding the intricate relationship between empirical findings and more traditional doctrinal approaches to law. This discussion centers on the following line of questions: i) In what sense do empirical studies form part of a legal science? ii) Why, if at all, should they be pursued at a law faculty? iii) What do empirical studies tell us about valid law? iv) What do they tell us about what obligations and rights people have? v) How do empirical findings relate to the kind of knowledge traditionally sought in the doctrinal study of law? Rather than attempting to give an answer to these questions, this contribution suggests a taxonomical framework within which discussion about them ought to take place. Based on an analysis of the different stances taken by prominent theorists on the relation between traditional doctrinal work and empirical work in the legal field, the author suggests that we should distinguish between the following three attitudes on the relation between traditional legal doctrinal studies and empirical studies of law: toleration, replacement, and synthesis.

KW - The Faculty of Law

KW - empiriske studier af retten

KW - retsfilosofi

KW - den empiriske vending

KW - empirical studies of law

KW - epistemology of law

KW - international legal theory

KW - The empirical turn

UR - https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3324954

M3 - Journal article

JO - European Journal of Legal Studies

JF - European Journal of Legal Studies

SN - 1973-2937

ER -

ID: 212499963