Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
http://hdl.handle.net/1942/24005Full metadata record
| DC Field | Value | Language |
|---|---|---|
| dc.contributor.author | HAGE, Jaap | - |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2017-07-19T07:33:13Z | - |
| dc.date.available | 2017-07-19T07:33:13Z | - |
| dc.date.issued | 2016 | - |
| dc.identifier.citation | INFORMAL LOGIC, 36(3), p. 271-287 | - |
| dc.identifier.issn | 0824-2577 | - |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/1942/24005 | - |
| dc.description.abstract | Doctrinal legal science seems to lack a proper method and purpose. This interpretation clarifies its value. The backbone of the argument consists of two theses. The first is that coherence—in a sense unusual in law—plays a crucial role in legal science. The second is that doctrinal legal science is a social enterprise and this should be considered in attempts to understand it. Based on these, a picture of doctrinal legal science is given consisting of parallel distributed constructions of consistent, comprehensive and expansive sets of legal beliefs. Given this, seeming weaknesses of doctrinal legal science turn out to be actual strengths. | - |
| dc.description.abstract | La science juridique doctrinale semble manquer d’une méthode et d’un but appropriés. Cette interprétation clarifie sa valeur. L'épine dorsale de l'argument se compose de deux thèses. La première est que la cohérence – dans un sens inhabituel dans la loi – joue un rôle crucial dans la science juridique. La seconde est que la science juridique doctrinale est une entreprise sociale et cela devrait être pris en compte dans les tentatives pour la comprendre. Fondée sur celles-ci, on qualifie la science juridique doctrinale d’être constituée de constructions parallèles distribuées d'ensembles cohérents, complets et expansifs de croyances juridiques. Compte tenu de cela, les faiblesses apparentes de la science juridique doctrinale se révèlent être des forces réelles. | - |
| dc.language.iso | en | - |
| dc.rights | © Jaap Hage. Informal Logic, | - |
| dc.subject.other | coherence; justification; legal science; methodology; world-3 knowledge | - |
| dc.title | Anything Goes: An Apology for Parallel Distributed Legal Science | - |
| dc.type | Journal Contribution | - |
| local.bibliographicCitation.conferencedate | DEC 10, 2014 | - |
| local.bibliographicCitation.conferencename | 1st International Workshop on Methodologies on Research on Legal Argumentation (MET-ARG) | - |
| local.bibliographicCitation.conferenceplace | Krakow, POLAND | - |
| dc.identifier.epage | 287 | - |
| dc.identifier.issue | 3 | - |
| dc.identifier.spage | 271 | - |
| dc.identifier.volume | 36 | - |
| local.bibliographicCitation.jcat | A1 | - |
| local.type.refereed | Refereed | - |
| local.type.specified | Article | - |
| dc.identifier.doi | 10.22329/il.v36i3.4719 | - |
| dc.identifier.isi | 000391013000002 | - |
| dc.identifier.url | https://ojs.uwindsor.ca/ojs/leddy/index.php/informal_logic/article/view/4719 | - |
| item.validation | ecoom 2018 | - |
| item.fulltext | With Fulltext | - |
| item.contributor | HAGE, Jaap | - |
| item.fullcitation | HAGE, Jaap (2016) Anything Goes: An Apology for Parallel Distributed Legal Science. In: INFORMAL LOGIC, 36(3), p. 271-287. | - |
| item.accessRights | Open Access | - |
| crisitem.journal.issn | 0824-2577 | - |
| crisitem.journal.eissn | 0824-2577 | - |
| Appears in Collections: | Research publications | |
Files in This Item:
| File | Description | Size | Format | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 4719-12241-1-PB.pdf | Published version | 218.86 kB | Adobe PDF | View/Open |
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.