La investigación jurídica desde una perspectiva contra-hegemónica: los TFG y TFM desde la Clínica Jurídica por la Justicia Social de la UPV/EHU (Legal research from a counter-hegemonic view: Final Degree Projects and Master’s Thesis from the Legal Clinic
Keywords:
Trabajo Fin de Grado, Trabajo Fin de Master, clínica jurídica, justicia social, investigación jurídica, modelo contra-hegemónico de jurista, pensamiento crítico, método CLEO, Final Degree Project, Master's Thesis, legal clinic, social justiceAbstract
En términos generales, este trabajo se ocupa de poner en valor la investigación jurídica concebida y practicada desde una perspectiva contra-hegemónica. Para ello, se lleva a cabo un análisis comparativo entre la manera tradicional de concebir la investigación jurídica, representada por el método CLEO (por sus siglas en inglés), con la manera en la que se investiga en los TFG y TFM realizados siguiendo el itinerario de la Clínica Jurídica por la Justicia Social de la Facultad de Derecho de la Universidad del País Vasco (UPV/EHU). Como resultado del análisis se cuestiona la premisa epistemológica fundamental del método tradicional, basada en la separación hecho-derecho para, alternativamente, defender un modelo de investigación jurídica que, partiendo de una lectura de la realidad basada en el testimonio de quienes sufren discriminación grupal, considere el derecho, más que como un marco al que incorporar los hechos, un objeto de crítica y transformación social.
In general, this work deals with the value of legal research conceived and practiced from a counter-hegemonic perspective. For this aim, it carries out a comparative analysis between the traditional way of conceiving legal research (represented by the CLEO method) and the way in which Final Degree Projects and Master’s Thesis are carried out by following the itinerary of the Legal Clinic for Social Justice of the Faculty of Law of the University of the Basque Country (UPV / EHU). As a result, the fundamental epistemological premise of the traditional method, based on the fact-law division, is questioned. Alternatively, the work defends a model of legal research based on the testimony of those who suffer group discrimination, considering the law, rather than as a framework to which incorporate the facts, an object of criticism and social transformation.
Available from: https://doi.org/10.35295/osls.iisl/0000-0000-0000-0951
Downloads
Downloads:
PDF 657
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
OSLS strictly respects intellectual property rights and it is our policy that the author retains copyright, and articles are made available under a Creative Commons licence. The Creative Commons Non-Commercial Attribution No-Derivatives licence is our default licence, further details available at https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0 If this is not acceptable to you, please contact us.
The non-exclusive permission you grant to us includes the rights to disseminate the bibliographic details of the article, including the abstract supplied by you, and to authorise others, including bibliographic databases, indexing and contents alerting services, to copy and communicate these details.
For information on how to share and store your own article at each stage of production from submission to final publication, please read our Self-Archiving and Sharing policy.
The Copyright Notice showing the author and co-authors, and the Creative Commons license will be displayed on the article, and you must agree to this as part of the submission process. Please ensure that all co-authors are properly attributed and that they understand and accept these terms.
