Ойген Эрлих: живое право против правового плюрализма?
In this article the author questions the role of Eugen Ehrlich’s sociological jurisprudence in contemporary debates about legal pluralism. In author’s opinion, the modern legal pluralism is too much concentrated on opposing state law to social law. This dualist understanding of law was not characteristic for Ehrlich who defended the thesis about unity of law. Law in society always displays its integrity, even if composed of many inner social orders. Nevertheless, law can be conceptually divided into two logical units: official (state and juristic) law and living (social) law. Neither was Ehrlich inclined to advocate for mechanical transformation of facticity into normativity – for this effect creative work of lawyers is needed. From this point of view, it is not possible to use Ehrlich’s socio-legal theory for justification of the project of anthropological jurisprudence to construct the term of law as inclusive of all the normative systems of social regulation. Listing Ehrlich as one of the founding fathers of legal pluralism is not undisputable, because legal pluralism itself is not a unified scientific doctrine, and many assertions of legal pluralists contradict to Ehrlich’s position. Ehrlich by far was not biased to attribute inferior positions to law and judiciary in the legal reality, which sometimes is typical of some legal pluralists.
The notion of globalization is relatively imprecise, and can be used loosely to embrace a large variety of different modern phenomena. Theorists abuse the G-words (a term of William Twining to demonstrate radical changes, or at least the changes which seem to be radical to some philosophers. Generalized references to new (quasi-)realities allow theorists to escape a long and laborious examination and comparison of legal phenomena in the past and in the present. This new kind of reductionism does not seek to describe complex systems through one or several prevailing elements as the classical scientific paradigm does. On the contrary, it is claimed that the growing complexity of the world requires a multidimensional approach which tries to embrace every aspect of reality.
In this work Georges Gurvithc analyzed the theory of sources of law formulated by Eugen Ehrlich
The article analyzes the artificial and protected by the law component of the national wealth including social infrastructure, industrial, intellectual and ideological potential, as well as the mass of goods and personal property of the citizens. It pays the main attention to the issues of criminal law protection of social infrastructure, including the constitutional order, political and economic systems, health and education. It also provides us with the proposals on the improvement of the criminal law and their application.
The article examines various theories of punishment, their relationship and criticism. Punishment is an object of study for different disciplines. Interdisciplinary barriers should be overcome. In this article we are to formulate the main principles of convergence of jurisprudence and sociology in the study of punishment.
The Encyclopedia of Law and Society is the largest comprehensive and international treatment of the law and society field. With an Advisory Board of 62 members from 20 countries and six continents, the three volumes of this state-of-the-art resource represent interdisciplinary perspectives on law from sociology, criminology, cultural anthropology, political science, social psychology, and economics. By globalizing the Encyclopedia's coverage, American and international law and society will be better understood within its historical and comparative context.
This book reflects the latest trends in the contemporary legal science. The author consequently develops his idea that interhuman communicatation and interaction play an important role in creation and in ligitimation of law, involving the social groups in a communicative process.