The aim of this paper is to critically reconsider some of the main tenets underlying Karl Olivecrona's works. The first two sections are devoted to a brief reconstruction of his position on methodology for the study of legal phenomena, including the endorsement of philosophical realism and the enterprise of demystifying legal language through linguistic therapy (§2), as well as his particular conception of legal notions as hollow words (§3). I will then provide a brief analysis of a central legal concept – that of ‘authority’ – to show how Olivecrona’s methodological framework can be applied (§4). The last two sections are devoted to the analysis and evaluation of three possible criticisms of Olivecrona's claims as a legal realist (§5) and some brief concluding remarks on the usefulness of Olivecrona's approach for contemporary legal philosophy (§6).
Back to (Law as) Fact
Julieta Rabanos
In corso di stampa
Abstract
The aim of this paper is to critically reconsider some of the main tenets underlying Karl Olivecrona's works. The first two sections are devoted to a brief reconstruction of his position on methodology for the study of legal phenomena, including the endorsement of philosophical realism and the enterprise of demystifying legal language through linguistic therapy (§2), as well as his particular conception of legal notions as hollow words (§3). I will then provide a brief analysis of a central legal concept – that of ‘authority’ – to show how Olivecrona’s methodological framework can be applied (§4). The last two sections are devoted to the analysis and evaluation of three possible criticisms of Olivecrona's claims as a legal realist (§5) and some brief concluding remarks on the usefulness of Olivecrona's approach for contemporary legal philosophy (§6).
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
