The legacy of Luhmann’s sociology of law
A trialogue among social theory, jurisprudence and empirical research
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.35295/osls.iisl.1923Palavras-chave:
sociology of law, socio-legal studies, social systems theory, sociological jurisprudence, jurisprudenceResumo
This paper aims to map the possibilities of adopting social systems theory in order to couple three usually isolated domains: social theory, jurisprudence and empirical research. It argues that these different uses would be the distinctive legacy of Luhmann’s work for legal research. The text suggests that investigations interested in adopting a systemic approach for discussions in each of these three domains (or in all of them) should focus on the entanglement among interactional, decisional and functional systems. However, this presupposes some enhancements in Luhmann’s own description of law as a social system. The core hypothesis presented here is that a functional system’s out-differentiation (its specialisation in face of other communications happening in the societal environment) depends on the inner-differentiation of this system – that is, on operations backed by the very construction of specific functional-systemic institutions and semantics (including decisional programs and self-descriptions).
Downloads
Metrics
Downloads:
First_Online_Fucci_Amato_OSLS (English) 8
Referências
Amato, L.F., 2020. Still a European anomaly? Theses on Luhmann, functional differentiation, world society and the legal system. In: M.A.L.L. Barros, L.F. Amato and G.F. Fonseca, eds., World society’s law: rethinking systems theory and socio-legal studies. Porto Alegre: Fi, 71–118.
Amato, L.F., 2021. Law and economy without “law and economics”? From new institutional economics to social systems theory. In: C.F. Campilongo, L.F. Amato and M.A.L.L. Barros, eds., Luhmann and socio-legal research: an empirical agenda for social systems theory [online]. Abingdon: Routledge, 110–138. Available at: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003120391-9 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003120391-9
Amato, L.F., 2023a. Diferenciación funcional, del concepto a al contexto empírico: escalas sistémicas, niveles estructurales y sincretismo entre formas de diferenciación social. Revista MAD - Revista del Magíster en Análisis Sistémico Aplicado a la Sociedad [online], 48, 15–38. Available at: https://semanariorepublicano.uchile.cl/index.php/RMAD/article/view/72133
Amato, L.F., 2023b. Social systems theory as a conceptual apparatus for surpassing the schism between empirical legal sociology and analytical jurisprudence (or re-describing the debate between Kelsen and Ehrlich through Luhmann’s lens). In: G.F. Fonseca, L.F. Amato and M.A.L.L. Barros, eds., Contemporary socio-legal studies: empirical and global perspectives [online]. Faculdade de Direito da Universidade de São Paulo, 85–118. Available at: https://www.livrosabertos.abcd.usp.br/portaldelivrosUSP/catalog/view/995/910/3353
Bobbio, N., 1976. Dalla struttura alla funzione: nuovi studi di teoria del diritto. Milan: Edizioni di Comunità.
Bourdieu, P., 1986. La force du droit: éléments pour une sociologie du champ juridique. Actes de la recherche en sciences sociales [online], 64(1), 3–19. Available at: https://doi.org/10.3406/arss.1986.2332 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3406/arss.1986.2332
Calvo-García, M., 2014. Positivismo jurídico y teoría sociológica del derecho. Sortuz, Oñati Journal of Emergent Socio-legal Studies [online], 6(1), 46–66. Available at: https://opo.iisj.net/index.php/sortuz/article/view/487
Campilongo, C.F., 2011. Política, sistema jurídico e decisão judicial 2nd ed. São Paulo: Saraiva. (Originally published in 2000).
Christodoulidis, E., 1996. The inertia of institutional imagination: a reply to Roberto Unger. The Modern Law Review [online], 59(3), 377–397. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2230.1996.tb02086.x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2230.1996.tb02086.x
Dutra, R., 2016. Diferenciação funcional e a sociologia da modernidade brasileira. Política & Sociedade [online], 15(34), 77–109. Available at: https://doi.org/10.5007/2175-7984.2016v15n34p77 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5007/2175-7984.2016v15n34p77
Dworkin, R., 2006. Hart and the Concepts of Law. Harvard Law Review Forum, 119, 95–104.
Ehrlich, E., 1936. Fundamental principles of the sociology of law. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. (Originally published in 1913).
Fuller, L.L. (K. Winston, ed.), 2001. The principles of social order: selected essays of Lon L. Fuller. 2nd ed. Oxford: Hart. (Originally published in 1981).
Fuller, L.L., 1969. A reply to critics. In: L.L. Fuller, The morality of law. 2nd ed. New Haven: Yale University Press, 187–242.
Habermas, J., 2009. Ronald Dworkin: a Maverick among legal scholars. In: J. Habermas, Europe: the faltering project. Cambridge: Polity, 37–46. (Originally published in 2006).
Hart, H.L.A., 1998. Kelsen visited. In: S.L. Paulson and B.L. Paulson, eds., Normativity and norms: critical perspectives on Kelsenian themes [online]. Oxford: Clarendon, 69–87. (Originally published in 1962). Available at: https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198763154.003.0004 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198763154.003.0004
Hart, H.L.A., 2012. The concept of law 3rd ed. Oxford: Clarendon. (Originally published in 1961).
Hesse, M.B., 1966. Models and analogies in science. University of Notre Dame Press.
Holmes, P., 2018. A teoria dos sistemas como semântica “crítica”: materialismo pós-estruturalista como método para uma teoria reflexiva da sociedade. In: L.F. Amato and M.A.L.L. Barros, eds., Teoria Crítica dos Sistemas? Crítica, teoria social e direito [online]. Porto Alegre: Fi, 101–137. Available at: https://www.editorafi.org/_files/ugd/48d206_55ed2ac8fe01488b89718288359b90c8.pdf
Kelsen, H., 1967. Pure theory of law [online]. Berkeley: University of California Press. (Originally published in 1960). Available at: https://doi.org/10.1525/9780520312296 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1525/9780520312296
Luhmann, N., 1983a. Fin y racionalidad en los sistemas: sobre la función de los fines en los sistemas sociales. Madrid: Torregalindo. (Originally published in 1968).
Luhmann, N., 1983b. Struttura della società e semantica. Bari: Laterza. (Originally published in 1980).
Luhmann, N., 1990a. La positività del diritto come pressupposto di una società moderna. In: N. Luhmann, La differenziazione del diritto: contributi alla sociologia e alla teoria del diritto. Bologna: Il Mulino, 103–146. (Originally published in 1970).
Luhmann, N., 1990b. Political theory in the Welfare State. Berlin: de Gruyter. (Originally published in 1981).
Luhmann, N., 1995. Legal argumentation: an analysis of its form. Modern Law Review [online], 58(3), 285–298. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2230.1995.tb02011.x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2230.1995.tb02011.x
Luhmann, N., 1996. La costituzione come acquisizione evolutiva. In: G. Zagrebelsky, P.P. Portinaro and J. Luther, eds., Il futuro della costituzione. Turin: Einaudi, 129–166. (Originally published in 1990).
Luhmann, N., 1997. La cultura como un concepto histórico. Historia y Grafía, 8, 11–33. (Originally published in 1995).
Luhmann, N., 1998a. Inclusión y exclusión. In: N. Luhmann, Complejidad y modernidad: de la unidad a la diferencia. Madrid: Trotta, 167–195. (Originally published in 1994).
Luhmann, N., 1998b. Observations on modernity. Redwood City: Stanford University Press. (Originally published in 1992).
Luhmann, N., 2000. The reality of mass media. Redwood City: Stanford University Press. (Originally published in 1996). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9781503619227
Luhmann, N., 2004. Law as a social system. Oxford University Press. (Originally published in 1993).
Luhmann, N., 2009. Causalidad en el sur. Estudios Sociológicos, 27(79), 3–29. (Originally published in 1995).
Luhmann, N., 2010. Los derechos fundamentales como institución: aportación a la sociología política. Ciudad de México: Universidad Iberoamericana. (Originally published in 1965).
Luhmann, N., 2012. Theory of society I. Redwood City: Stanford University Press. (Originally published in 1997).
Luhmann, N., 2013. Theory of society II. Redwood City: Stanford University Press. (Originally published in 1997).
Luhmann, N., 2014. A sociological theory of law. 2nd ed. New York: Routledge. (Originally published in 1972).
MacCormick, N., 2005. Rhetoric and the rule of law: a theory of legal reasoning [online]. Oxford University Press. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199571246.001.0001 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199571246.001.0001
MacCormick, N., 2008. Entrevista com Neil MacCormick. In: N. MacCormick. Retórica e o estado de direito: uma teoria da argumentação jurídica. Rio de Janeiro: Elsevier, 363-376.
Mascareño, A., 2007. Sociología del método: la forma de investigación sistémica. Primavera, 3(2), 1–41.
Minhoto, L.D., and Amato, L.F., 2013. Adorno, Luhmann and the critique of identity: some internal connections. In: H.F. Dahms, ed., Planetary Sociology [online]. Bingley: Emerald, 251–266. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1108/S0278-120420230000040013 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/S0278-120420230000040013
Moita, E., 2023. The nature and impacts of noncompliance [online]. Oxford: Hart. Available at: https://doi.org/10.5040/9781509966271 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5040/9781509966271
Neves, M., 2013. Transconstitutionalism. Oxford: Hart.
Nonet, P., and Selznick, P., 2001. Law and society in transition: toward responsive law. 2nd ed. New Brunswick: Transaction. (Originally published in 1978).
Parsons, T., 1949. The structure of social action: a study in social theory with special reference to a group of recent European writers. 2nd ed. New York: Free Press. (Originally published in 1937).
Parsons, T., 1991. The social system 2nd ed. London: Routledge. (Originally published in 1951).
Parsons, T., 2008. Talcott Parsons on law and the legal system. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars.
Santos, B.S., 1977. The law of the oppressed: the construction and reproduction of legality in Pasárgada. Law & Society Review [online], 12(1), 5–126. Available at: https://doi.org/10.2307/3053321 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/3053321
Schauer, F., 2009. Institutions and the concept of law: a reply to Ronald Dworkin (with some help from Neil MacCormick). In: M. Del Mar and Z. Bankowski, eds., Law as institutional normative order. Farnham: Ashgate, 35–44.
Schauer, F., 2015. The force of law. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Simon, H.A., 1955. Recent advances in organization theory. In: S.K. Baley et al., Research frontiers in politics and government. Washington: Brookings Institution, 23–44.
Simon, H.A., 1977. The new science of management decision 3rd ed. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall. (Originally published in 1960).
Teubner, G., 1993. Law as an autopoietic system. Oxford: Blackwell.
Unger, R.M., 1976. Law in modern society: toward a criticism of social theory. New York: Free Press.
Unger, R.M., 1987. Social theory: its situation and its task. Cambridge University Press.
Weber, M., 1978. Economy and society: an outline of interpretive sociology. Berkeley: University of California Press. (Originally published in 1922).
Downloads
Publicado
Como Citar
Edição
Seção
Licença
Copyright (c) 2023 Lucas Fucci Amato
Este trabalho está licenciado sob uma licença Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International 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.
