Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Luhmann’s Judgment.Claudius Messner - 2014 - International Journal for the Semiotics of Law - Revue Internationale de Sémiotique Juridique 27 (2):359-387.
    This paper explores what is apparently a non-topic for Luhmann. Luhmann is preoccupied with decision-making rather than with judgment. The paper argues that Luhmann, attempting to find a way out of the dilemma between the fundamentalism of positivistic legal theory and the relativism of anti-foundationalist post-modern thinking, presents the epistemological–ethical doublet of a “self-binding” of the law. In this bootstrapping manoeuvre decision plays the central part. The paper begins by examining judgment in its relation to decision as considered by non-system-theoretical (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • The Subject May have Disappeared but its Sufferings Remain.Marinos Diamantides - 2000 - Law and Critique 11 (2):137-166.
    Today there is no sophisticated theory, which continues to rely on subjectivist premises. It is important, however, that anti-humanism theory's disinterestedness in the subject of voluntarism does not lead to an indifference towards being's constitutive non-essence and passivity in the manner of the worst kind of humanism. Emmanuel Levinas' places ‘absurd’ suffering in the place of essence as the knot of subjectivity; his view of the quiddity of suffering as mode of being passively rather than as psychological content and of (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • A theory of legislation from a systems perspective.Peter Harrison - unknown
    In this thesis I outline a view of primary legislation from a systems perspective. I suggest that systems theory and, in particular, autopoietic theory, as modified by field theory, is a mechanism for understanding how society operates. The description of primary legislation that I outline differs markedly from any conventional definition in that I argue that primary legislation is not, and indeed cannot be, either a law or any of the euphemisms that are usually accorded to an enactment by a (...)
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark