This book has been considered by academicians and scholars of great significance and value to literature. This forms a part of the knowledge base for future generations. We have represented this book in the same form as it was first published. Hence any marks seen are left intentionally to preserve its true nature.

The Making of Modern Law: Foreign, Comparative and International Law, 1600-1926, brings together foreign, comparative, and international titles in a single resource. Its International Law component features works of some of the great legal theorists, including Gentili, Grotius, Selden, Zouche, Pufendorf, Bijnkershoek, Wolff, Vattel, Martens, Mackintosh, Wheaton, among others. The materials in this archive are drawn from three world-class American law libraries: the Yale Law Library, the George Washington University Law Library, and the Columbia Law Library.Now for the first time, (...) these high-quality digital scans of original works are available via print-on-demand, making them readily accessible to libraries, students, independent scholars, and readers of all ages.+++++++++++++++The below data was compiled from various identification fields in the bibliographic record of this title. This data is provided as an additional tool in helping to insure edition identification: +++++++++++++++Yale Law LibraryLP3Y100890019050101The Making of Modern Law: Foreign, Comparative, and International Law, 1600-1926Tubingen: J. C. B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck), 1905xii, 366 p.; 24 cmGermany. (shrink)

An lisis de los problemas jur dicos y las consecuencias de tipo social y econ mico que conllevan las formas de organizaci n pol tica. En este tratado se re nen los principios b sicos y la informaci n hist rica de la teor a jur dica relativa al Estado. la traducci n fue realizada por Fernando de los R os, quien adem s escribi un pr logo en el que analiza el plan general de esta obra y precisa cu (...) les son sus antecedentes te ricos. (shrink)

Jellinek define “estatus” como la “relación con el Estado que califica al individuo”. Su teoría distingue cuatro tipos: pasivo o subiectionis, negativo o libertatis, positivo o civitatis y activo o de la ciudadanía activa. Al margen de las polémicas sobre su vigencia, se pretende relacionar la aportación de Jellinek con la concepción del consentimiento informado del Tribunal Constitucional español, quien lo ha definido como deber de abstención de los profesionales sanitarios (STC 37/2011, de 28 de marzo, entre otras), (...) es decir, como una negación de su competencia en la terminología de Hohfeld, o como un derecho de defensa. Debido a la adecuación de su estructura al contenido del consentimiento informado, el análisis se centrará en los estatus negativo y positivo. La cuestión versa sobre la posición de los derechos de defensa en la tesis de Jellinek y si es viable su empleo en la conceptualización de los actuales derechos fundamentales. (shrink)

Georg Jellinek ist wie kein anderer Staatsdenker seiner Zeit bis heute präsent geblieben. Seine Formel von der "normativen Kraft des Faktischen" gehört zum festen Bestand der politischen Literatur. Die Autoren dieses Bandes stellen die wichtigsten Aspekte seiner Staatstheorie vor und fragen nach ihrer Bedeutung für die heutige Staatslehre.

Heidelberg's intellectual milieu of the early twentieth century can be characterised as a ‘laboratory of the modern age’. Here scholars intensively discussed the crisis of the modern age and in numerous historical and systematic studies attempted to determine the ‘cultural significance’ of religion for modernity. This article takes a look at exemplary aspects of the debates on religion of the jurist Georg Jellinek, the sociologist Max Weber and the Protestant theologian Ernst Troeltsch. Jellinek investigated the significance of religious (...) ideas for the genesis of modern human rights, Weber analysed the ascetic-Protestant, i.e. Puritan roots of the modern capitalism and Troeltsch examined the differences between the social ethos of German Lutheranism and that of the Calvinist world of thought. The primary concern of all was the relevance of religion to present times. For this reason it is necessary that the theories set forth by Jellinek, Weber and Troeltsch also be read with regard to their possible ‘cultural significance’ for the present day. (shrink)

Presented as a Vorlesung in the German philosophical tradition, this book presents the most detailed account of Nelson's method of argument analysis, celebrated by many luminaries such as Karl Popper. It was written in 1921 in opposition to the relativistic, subjectivistic and nihilistic tendencies of Nelson's time. The book contains an exposition of a method that is a further development of Kant's transcendental dialectics, followed by an application to the critical analysis of arguments by many famous thinkers, including Bentham, Mill, (...) Poincaré, Leibniz, Hegel, Einstein, Bergson, Rickert, Simmel, Brentano, Stammler, Jellinek, Dingler, and Meinong. The book presents a general theory of philosophical argumentation as seen from the viewpoint of the typical fallacies committed by anybody arguing philosophically, whether professional philosophers or philosophical laypeople. Although the nature of philosophy and philosophical argumentation is one of the most recurrent objects of reflection for philosophers, this book represents the first attempt at a general theory of philosophical fallacy. According to Nelson, it is in the shape of false dilemmas that errors in reasoning always emerge, and false dilemmas are always the result of the same mechanism--the unwitting replacement of one concept for another. (shrink)

The article focuses on the concept of the state in the works of the German sociologist M. Weber and his contemporary, the anarchist G. Landauer. Specifically, it is commonly thought that Weber has a unique interpretation of the state, its nature, and inalienable characteristics. This Weberian approach did not fit into any of the traditions that existed at that time in Germany (for example, represented by H. Kelsen, G. Jellinek, and O. von Gierke). However, the author of the article (...) tries to demonstrate that three main Weberian aspects of the state — 1) the monopoly on legitimate physical violence, 2) the relationship of domination, which is accompanied by a minimum desire to obey, and 3) the chance for the regular reproducibility of these relationships — are consonant with Landauer’s concept of the state. This discovered conceptual affinity allows one to look at Weber’s sociology from new angles, without being impacted by the personal beliefs of the German scientist, who very critically treated anarchism as a socio-political movement. In the final section of the paper, the author discusses the modern project of “anarchist sociology”, which also uses Weberian methodology. The paper argues that “anarchist sociology” might be a promising social science with ts unique vision of several key sociological topics, such as domination, power, or social inequality. (shrink)

This work traces, departing from the method of structures of thought, the influence of the doctrines of Duns Scotus and Ockham in 19 th Century dogmatics. Milestones of this transformation are Windscheid’s doctrine on legal rights and Jellinek’s doctrines on public legal rights and the self-limitation of the state, as well as Laband’s distinction between the material sense of law and the formal. This multiplication of formal distinctions dissolves the modern subject in the system. Only a radical approach enables (...) us to understand the sense of legal modernity: the separation made by Scotus and nominalism between object and subject is what in the final instance explains liberal (possessive) individualism and its legal consequences. (shrink)

Még 2013 májusában került sor arra a Metafora című nyelvészeti és filozófiai workshopra, amelynek a keretein belül elhangzottak a jelen kötetben helyet kapott tanulmányok alapját képező, az Erasmus Kollégium nyelvfilozófiai kutatócsoportjának tagjai által jegyzett előadások. Ezeknek, s így a mostani összeállításnak is kiemelt témája a relevanciaelmélet, amellyel (pontosabban annak metaforafelfogásával) részletesen foglalkozik a bevezető dolgozat, illetve az azt követő három írás. Ezek közül az elsőben Pete Krisztián a teória klasszikus vonulatát állítja párhuzamba az átdolgozott, továbbfejlesztett változatokkal, majd Zvolenszky Zsófia - (...) részben ehhez kapcsolódva - a konvencionális és költői metaforák témáját illetően kritikával illeti a modern megközelítést. Kuti Judit a Sperber-Wilson- és a Harald Weinrich-féle metaforaelméletet hasonlítja össze. A folytatásban olyanok metaforaleméleteivel ismerkedhetünk meg, mint Donald Davidson és Paul Ricoeur; Kálmán László egy hagyományos irányzatból kinövő, mégis új nyelvfelfogást és metaforaelemzést mutat be; Kiss Angelika és Jellinek Sára egy-egy nyelvhasználati jelenséget és metaforikus beszédmódot mutat be (a japán és koreai nyelv, és a humor nyelvfilozófiai vonatkozásai kapcsán); Nemesi Attila László a filmes és mozgóképes trópusokról, s azok csoportosításáról ír; Molnár Cecília Sarolta pedig a mai modern dalszövegek metaforakészletét elemzi. A mutatóval záruló kiadvány nyelvészeti szakgyűjteményekbe javasolható beszerzésre. (shrink)

It is usually assumed that political modernity and the reformation go hand in hand. Authors such as Hegel, Tocqueville, Jellinek or Martha Nussbaum find in the protestant reformation the origin of ideas such as political freedom or freedom of conscience. In this paper, I will try to analyze the relationship between these two concepts in two fundamental characters in the Calvinist tradition. John Calvin, its founding father, on the one hand, and, on the other, Pierre Bayle, the Rotterdam philosopher (...) who pushed Calvinism to its most heterodox forms in the XVII century. I will show how they both understand the interpretation of the Bible and the political arrangements that they defended for their close context. (shrink)

In this reply to the commentary in the volume, some intellectual, historical, and biographical context is provided for the writings discussed. This includes a brief account of the trajectory from Sociological Explanation as Translation, and a discussion of the general problem of the substrate of social explanation and the status of social theories as ideal-typical constructions with a problematic relation to this substrate. On this basis, the themes of practices, normativity, and the problem of the meaning of reasons explanations are (...) reconsidered. An outline of a view of norms based on the notion of Jellinek of the normative power of the real is given and related to Russian developmental psychology. This extends and gives a psychological base to the pragmatic account of norms and practical normativity that runs through these texts. The chapter concludes with a discussion of social science, including the problems of the status of economic theory, the objectivity of field work and the problem of underdetermination, and the political significance of Parsons. (shrink)

Buscar os fundamentos de qualquer norma significa, em outras palavras, buscar explicar sua obrigatoriedade. O tema, por si, já se revela complexo porque parece deixar à mercê de cada intérprete a escolha dos alicerces que justificarão o dever de cumprir conteúdos tão caros ao convívio social. Justificar o reconhecimento dos direitos humanos por meio de uma linha de argumentação histórica foi o caminho escolhido por autores importantes, a exemplo de Norberto Bobbio. O amplo alcance de trabalhos construídos sobre as bases (...) de fundamentos históricos colocou a Declaração dos Direitos do Homem e do Cidadão como fonte certa da Declaração Universal de Direitos Humanos. A fim de analisar o peso da influência da Declaração Francesa sobre a Declaração adotada pelas Nações Unidas verificou-se o debate entre Jellinek e Boutmy acerca dos fundamentos da Declaração Francesa.Trata-se de artigo que traz breve revisão de literatura acerca dos fundamentos dos direitos humanos e pesquisa com metodologia qualitativa, método histórico de procedimento. (shrink)

Jüdische Gelehrte reagierten auf Bruno Bauers antisemitisches Pamphlet Die Judenfrage (1842) auf ganz verschiedene Weise. Gemeinsam war allen Antworten jedoch die Annahme, dass die Mission des Judentums an Kultur und Humanität noch nicht erfüllt ist und auch nicht vom Christentum allein erfüllt werden kann. Nur der mosaische Monotheismus war dazu bestimmt, „den zivilisierten Nationen eine moralische Grundlage zu geben“, wie Gotthold Salomon, einer der in diesem Aufsatz behandelten Denker, gegen Bauer schrieb. Andere Disputanten, wie Hermann Jellinek, behaupteten sogar eine (...) absolute theologische Überlegenheit des Judentums gegenüber der halb-paganen christlichen Religion, wieder andere, wie der Luxemburger Oberrabbiner Samuel Hirsch, sahen im Judentum zumindest das bessere, das essentiellere Christentum. Keiner der jüdischen Gegner Bauers jedoch war mit dessen These einverstanden, dass es sich beim Judentum um ein überholtes Religionsmodell handelte, das nur noch künstlich von einigen halsstarrigen Traditionalisten am Leben gehalten wird. Ob die jüdischen Theologen Bauer als moralisch gefährlichen Atheisten oder eher als Hegelianischen Wiederbeleber der alten christlichen Substitutionslehre sahen, die hier besprochene öffentliche Debatte mit Bauer gab ihnen eine willkommene Gelegenheit – möglicherweise sogar zum allerersten Mal – den genauen Ort des Judentums innerhalb der Entwicklung der kulturellen Idee der Religion in der Weltgeschichte zu bestimmen. (shrink)

Kant.--Stammler.--Critiek van Binder. Anticritiek.--Proeve van methodologische critiek aan de hand van Stammler's theorie (zuivere rechtsleer) Jellinek's "Allgemeine staatslehre.".

This book explores the interrelation of facts and norms. How does law originate in the first place? What lies at the roots of this phenomenon? How is it preserved? And how does it come to an end? Questions like these led Georg Jellinek to speak of the “normative force of the factual” in the early 20th century, emphasizing the human tendency to infer rules from recurring events, and to perceive a certain practice not only as a fact but as (...) a norm; a norm which not only allows us to distinguish regularity from irregularity, but at the same time, to treat deviances as transgressions. Today, Jellinek’s concept still provides astonishing insights on the dichotomy of “is” and “ought to be”, the emergence of the normative, the efficacy and the defeasibility of norms, and the distinct character of what legal theorists refer to as “normativity”. It leads us back to early legal history, it connects anthropology and legal theory, and it demonstrates the interdependence of law and the social sciences. In short: it invites us to fundamentally reassess the interrelation of facts and norms from various perspectives. The contributing authors to this volume have accepted that invitation. (shrink)

El libro recientemente publicado por Nuria Sánchez Madrid sobre Hannah Arendt destaca tanto por el elevado nivel teórico que presenta como por la original aproximación a su pensamiento. La obra de Arendt es ciertamente una de las de mayor repercusión en el contexto del pensamiento político contemporáneo, lo cual ha dado lugar a una amplísima bibliografía en torno a ella. Por lo que constituye una tarea verdaderamente meritoria presentar un ensayo novedoso sobre su obra, que transcienda los lugares comunes que (...) caracterizan a muchos de los ensayos que se publican sobre ella y abra nuevas perspectivas sobre su pensamiento. Esto lo consigue el libro de Nuria Sánchez Madrid a través de dos expedientes fundamentales. En primer lugar, sacando a luz toda una serie de presencias latentes en el pensamiento arendtiano, autores como Max Weber, Georg Jellinek, Ernst Cassirer o Alexander Kojève, que no aparecen explícitamente tematizados en la obra de Arendt y sobre los que las investigaciones prácticamente no han centrado la atención, pero que como se pone de manifiesto a lo largo del libro dejaron una huella en su pensamiento. En segundo lugar, confrontando a Arendt con algunas de las principales figuras del pensamiento político contemporáneo, como Judith Butler o Judith Shklar, lo que arroja nueva luz sobre determinados aspectos fundamentales de su obra, que normalmente son tratados desde la inmanencia del marco teórico que impone la categorización arendtiana y no se logra captar el carácter problemático de los mismos. (shrink)