Methodologies of legal research : which kind of method for what kind of discipline?
Material type:
- 9789386643230
- 340.072 HOE
Item type | Current library | Collection | Call number | Materials specified | Status | Notes | Date due | Barcode | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
![]() |
BMU Library | Reference | 340.072 HOE (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | Available | SOL | L2353 | |||
![]() |
BMU Library | Text Books | 340.072 HOE (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | Available | SOL | L2354 |
Browsing BMU Library shelves, Collection: Text Books Close shelf browser (Hides shelf browser)
340.0711 MOR Getting a PhD in law | 340.0711 MOR Getting a PhD in law | 340.072 CAN Oxford handbook of empirical legal research | 340.072 HOE Methodologies of legal research : which kind of method for what kind of discipline? | 340.072 MYN Legal research methodology | 340.072 MYN Legal research methodology | 340.072 SIN Legal research methodology |
Until quite recently questions about methodology in legal research have been largely confined to understanding the role of doctrinal research as a scholarly discipline. In turn this has involved asking questions not only about coverage but, fundamentally, questions about the identity of the discipline. Is it (mainly) descriptive, hermeneutical, or normative? Should it also be explanatory? Legal scholarship has been torn between, on the one hand, grasping the expanding reality of law and its context, and, on the other, reducing this complex whole to manageable proportions. The purely internal analysis of a legal system, isolated from any societal context, remains an option, and is still seen in the approach of the French academy, but as law aims at ordering society and influencing human behaviour, this approach is felt by many scholars to be insufficient. Consequently many attempts have been made to conceive legal research differently. Social scientific and comparative approaches have proven fruitful. However, does the introduction of other approaches leave merely a residue of 'legal doctrine', to which pockets of social sciences can be added, or should legal doctrine be merged with the social sciences? What would such a broad interdisciplinary field look like and what would its methods be? This book is an attempt to answer some of these questions.
There are no comments on this title.