Advertisement

The Liverpool Law Review

, Volume 4, Issue 1, pp 5–18 | Cite as

Phenomenology and jurisprudence

  • David Schiff
Article
  • 72 Downloads

Keywords

Supra Note Legal Theory Legal Norm Legal Concept Phenomenological Method 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Jurisprudence, Minnesota, West Publishing Co., 1959, Vol. 1, 282–283.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    With the main exception of W. Friedmann,Legal Theory, London, Stevens, 1967.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    This position within jurisprudence can be seen in the more general context of different philosophic traditions: see H. Spiegelberg,The Phenomenological Movement: A Historical Introduction, The Hague, Nijhoff, 1960, vol. II, ch. XIII, esp. 647–650.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Modern Trends in the History of Legal Philosophy, Amsterdam, North-Holland Publishing Co., 1979, 260–265.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    See “Phenomenology and Legal Theory” inPhenomenology and the Social Sciences (ed. M. Natanson), Evanston, Northwestern University Press, 1973, vol. 2, part VIII.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Adolf Reinach,Zur Phänomenologie des Rechts, München, Kösel-Verlag, 1953, originally published asDie apriorischen Grundlagen des bürgerlichen Rechts, 1913; Gerhart Husserl,Recht und Welt: Rechtsphilosophische Abhandlungen, Frankfurt, V. Klostermann, 1964, and seePhänomenologie, Rechtsphilosophie, Jurisprudenz: Festchrift für Gerhart Husserl, Frankfurt, V. Klostermann, 1969.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Particularly Felix Kaufmann,Die Kriterion des Rechts, Tübingen, Mohr, 1925; Fritz Schreier,Grundbegriffe und Grundformen des Rechts, Leipzig, F. Deuticke, 1924; See A. S. de Bustamante y Montoro, “Kelsenism”, inInterpretations of Modern Legal Philosophies Essays in honour of Roscoe Pound (ed. P. Sayre), New York, Oxford University Press, 1947, 43–51.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Especially Paul Amselek,Méthode Phénoménologique et Théorie du Droit, Paris, L.G.D.J., 1964; Jean-Louis Gardies, “La philosophie du droit d’Adolf Reinach”, XArchives de philosophie du droit (1965), 17; Georges Kalinowski, “La logique des normes d’Edmund Husserl”, XArchives de philosophie du. droit (1965), 107; Simone Goyard,Essai de Critique Phénoménologique de Droit (Thesis, Paris, 1971); and, of course, within the sociology of law, G. D. Gurvitch,Sociology of Law, London, Routledge, 1947.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Nicos Ar. Poulantzas,Nature des Choses et Droit: Essai sur la dialectique du fait et de la valeur, Paris, L.G.D.J. 1965; Nicos Ar. Poulantzas, “Notes sur la phénoménologie et l’existentialisme juridiques”, VIIIArchives de philosophie du droit (1963), 213. See Michel Villey, “Phénoménologie et existentialo-marxisme à la Faculte de droit de Paris”, XArchives de philosophie du droit (1965), 157.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Carlos Cossio, “Phenomenology of the Decision” and Luis Recaséns Siches, “Human Life, Society and Law” inLatin-American Legal Philosophy translated by Gordon Ireland, Massachusetts, 1948.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Especially in the later writings of Gustav Radbruch; see hisRechtsphilosophie, Stuttgart, K. F. Koehler, 1950.Google Scholar
  12. 13.
    Carlos Cossio, “Jurisprudence and the Sociology of Law”, 52Columbia Law Review (1952), 356 and 479.Google Scholar
  13. 14.
    See Julius Stone, “The Nature of Things” on the Way to Positivism? Reflections on a “Concrete Natural Law,”” 50Archiv für Rechts-und Sozialphilosophie (1964), 146.Google Scholar
  14. 15.
    K. N. Llewellyn, “Some Realism about Realism”, 44Harvard Law Review (1931), 1222.Google Scholar
  15. 16.
    In contrast to many writers within the American Realist School who characteristically offer compact definitions of law see e.g. the three examples offered by H. L. A. Hart,The Concept of Law, Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1961, 1.Google Scholar
  16. 17.
    Alfred Schutz, “Some leading concepts of phenomenology”,Essays in Phenomenology (ed. M. Natanson) The Hague, Martinus Nijhoff, 1969, 23.Google Scholar
  17. 18.
    On its historical derivation, see Joseph J. Kockelmans, “What is Phenomenology? Some Fundamental Themes of Husserl’s Phenomenology” inPhenomenology: The Philosophy of Edmund Husserl and its Interpretation (ed. Joseph J. Kockelmans), New York, Anchor Books, 1967, 24.Google Scholar
  18. 19.
    Dorion Cairns, “An Approach to Phenomenology” inPhilosophical Essays in memory of Edmund Husserl (ed. M. Farber), Cambridge, Masachusetts, Harvard University Press, 1940, 3.Google Scholar
  19. 20.
    For example, H. Spiegelberg,supra note 3,, vol. II, Ch. XIV: “The essentials of the phenomenological method”; Richard M. Zaner,The Way of Phenomenology: Criticism as a Philosophical Discipline, New York, Pegasus, 1970; Maurice Natanson,The Journeying Self: A Study in Philosophy and Social Role, Reading, Massachusetts, Addison-Wesley Publishing Co., 1970.Google Scholar
  20. 21.
    Edmund Husserl:Philosopher of Infinite Tasks, Evanston, Northwestern University Press, 1973, 19.Google Scholar
  21. 22.
    See, for example, E. Husserl,The Idea of Phenomenology, The Hague, Martinus Nijhoff, 1964, 1–12.Google Scholar
  22. 23.
    The expression of this analysis is scattered throughout Husserl’s writing e. g.ibid. lecture II;Ideas: General Introduction to Pure Phenomenology, London, Allen and Unwin, 1931, Second Section.Google Scholar
  23. 24.
    see hisThe Crisis of European Sciences and Transcendental Phenomenology, Evanston, Northwestern University Press, 1970.Google Scholar
  24. 25.
    Gerd Brand, “Intentionality, Reduction and Intentional Analysis in Husserl’s Later Manuscripts”, in Joseph J. Kockelmans (ed.),supra note 18. at 200.Google Scholar
  25. 26.
    Ibid.. at 201.Google Scholar
  26. 27.
    See Maurice Natanson, “Phenomenology and Existentialism: Husserl and Sartre on Intentionality”, in Joseph J. Kockelmans (ed.),ibid.. 338, on the possibilities of Husserl’s “intentionality” for existential philosophy.Google Scholar
  27. 28.
    Edmund Husserl,The Idea of Phenomenology, supra note 22,, at 13, and the whole of Lecture I.Google Scholar
  28. 29.
    On “possibilities” and “potential evidence” see Edmund Husserl,Cartesian Meditations, The Hague, Martinus Nijhoff, 1960, 60 and the whole of the Third Meditation.Google Scholar
  29. 30.
    Husserl describes this as “Radical alteration of the Natural thesis “disconnexion”, “bracketing”, ”supra note 23Ideas: General Introduction to Pure Phenomenology, London, Allen and Unwin, 1931, at 107–111.Google Scholar
  30. 32.
    Edmund Husserl,Cartesian Meditations, supra note 29 at 45.Google Scholar
  31. 33.
    “Phenomenology and the Sciences of Man” inThe Primacy of Perception, translated by John Wild, Evanston, Northwestern University Press, 1964, 86.Google Scholar
  32. 34.
    The Concise Encyclopaedia of Western Philosophy and Philosophers (ed. J. O. Urmson), London, Hutchinson, 1960, 189.Google Scholar
  33. 35.
    See Herbert Spiegelberg, “How Subjective is Phenomenology?”, in Natanson,supra note 17. at 137.Google Scholar
  34. 36.
    See R. W. Bologh,Dialectical phenomenology: Marx’s method, London, Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1979, ch. 1.Google Scholar
  35. 37.
    Supra note 35, in Natanson,supra note 17 , at 141.Google Scholar
  36. 38.
    The Age of Analysis (ed. M. White), New York, New American Library of World Literature, 1956, 104.Google Scholar
  37. 39.
    Paul Amselek, “The Phenomenological Description of Law”,supra note 5 in at II. 374–375.Google Scholar
  38. 40.
    The Crisis of European Sciences and Transcendental Phenomenology, supra note 24, Evanston, Northwestern University Press, 1970, Part III.Google Scholar
  39. 41.
    See Marvin Farber, “The Ideal of a Presuppositionless Philosophy”,supra note 19 in at 54–58.Google Scholar
  40. 42.
    See, for examples, R. K. Raval, “An Essay on Phenomenology”, 33Philosophy and Phenomenological Research (1972), 216; V. Peschka, “La phénomenologisme dans la philosophie du droit moderne”, XIIIArchives de philosophie du droit (1967), 259; Mitchell Franklin, “The Mandarinism of Phenomenological Philosophy of Law”, in Natanson,supra note 5 inPhenomenology and the Social Sciences (ed. M. Natanson), Evanston, Northwestern University Press, 1973, at II. 455.Google Scholar
  41. 44.
    For example,Logical Investigations, London, Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1970, Vol. 1, 51.Google Scholar
  42. 45.
    Zur Phänomenologie des Rechts, supra note 6,.Google Scholar
  43. 46.
    “Phenomenology and Legal Theory”, in Natanson,supra note 5 in at II. 347.Google Scholar
  44. 47.
    Die apriorischen Grundlagen des bürgerlichen Rechts,supra note 6 , 1913 at 4, (Friedmann’sGoogle Scholar
  45. 48.
    Quoted by Friedmann,supra note 46 “, in Natanson,supra note 5 in at II. 348.Google Scholar
  46. 49.
    See Herbert Spiegelberg,supra note 3,, vol. I at 195–205.Google Scholar
  47. 50.
    See M. Roche,Phenomenology, language and the social sciences, London, Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1973, 289–295.Google Scholar
  48. 51.
    Supra note 8..Google Scholar
  49. 52.
    “The Phenomenological Description of Law”, in Natanson,supra note 5 in at II. 368–369. Amselek is quoting Henri Bergson,The Two Sources of Morality and Religion, New York, Macmillan and Co., 1935, 298. On this part of Bergson’s theory, see Colin Smith,Contemporary French Philosophy: A Study in Norms and Values, London, Macmillan and Co., 1968, 143–161.Google Scholar
  50. 53.
    These categories are drawn from Husserl, seeIdeas… supra note 23Ideas: General Introduction to Pure Phenomenology, London, Allen and Unwin, 1931 at 71.Google Scholar
  51. 55.
    Supra note 52 “, in Natanson,supra note 5 in at 444.Google Scholar
  52. 56.
    Ibid. “, Natanson,supra note 5 in at 449.Google Scholar
  53. 57.
    Ibid. “, Natanson,supra note 5 in, at 388.Google Scholar
  54. 58.
    Ibid. “, Natanson,supra note 5 in, at 390;cf. H. Kelsen,General Theory of Law and State, translated by A. Wedberg, Cambridge, Mass., Harvard University Press, 1945, 47–49.Google Scholar
  55. 59.
    Amselek,supra note 52 “, Natanson,supra note 5 in, at II. 406.Google Scholar
  56. 61.
    Supra note 52 “, Natanson,supra note 5 in, at II. 443.Google Scholar
  57. 62.
    Supra note 16.Google Scholar
  58. 63.
    70Law Quarterly Review (1954), 37.Google Scholar
  59. 64.
    71Harvard Law Review (1958), 593.Google Scholar
  60. 65.
    Philosophical Investigations, translated by G. E. M. Anscombe, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1953, 47e.Google Scholar
  61. 67.
    Maurice Merleau-Ponty,Consciousness and the Acquisition of Language, Evanston, Northwestern University Press, 1973, 4.Google Scholar
  62. 68.
    The Concept of Law, supra note 16, Ch.X.Google Scholar
  63. 69.
    E.g.supra note 63 70Law Quarterly Review (1954) at 45–49.Google Scholar
  64. 70.
    Supra note 24 at 144.Google Scholar
  65. 71.
    Supra note 16, Preface.Google Scholar
  66. 72.
  67. 73.
    Supra note 23Ideas: General Introduction to Pure Phenomenology, London, Allen and Unwin, 1931, at 105.Google Scholar
  68. 74.
    The Structures of the Life-World, London, Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1974, 5.Google Scholar
  69. 75.
    E. Husserl,Ideas, supra note 23Ideas: General Introduction to Pure Phenomenology, London, Allen and Unwin, 1931, at 107.Google Scholar
  70. 76.
    Maurice Merleau-Ponty,supra note 67, at 5–6.Google Scholar
  71. 77.
    The Concept of Law, supra note 16 at 245.Google Scholar
  72. 78.
    Logical Investigations, supra note 44, London, Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1970, Vol. 1, at 245.Google Scholar
  73. 79.
    The Pure Theory of Law (translated M. Knight), Berkeley & Los Angeles, University of California Press, 1967.Google Scholar
  74. 80.
    Supra note 8 ; at 145.Google Scholar
  75. 81.
    Ibid. ; at 73.Google Scholar
  76. 82.
    „Eine phänomenologische Rechtstheorie”, 15Österreichische Zeitschrift für öffentliches Recht (1965), 383.Google Scholar
  77. 83.
    Supra note 58 “, at 4.Google Scholar
  78. 84.
    Pure Theory, supra note 79The Pure Theory of Law (translated M. Knight), Berkeley & Los Angeles, University of California Press, 1967 at 201.Google Scholar
  79. 85.
    Ibid. The Pure Theory of Law (translated M. Knight), Berkeley & Los Angeles, University of California Press, 1967. at 193–221.Google Scholar
  80. 86.
    Supra note 24 see hisThe Crisis of European Sciences and Transcendental Phenomenology, Evanston, Northwestern University Press, 1970 at 104.Google Scholar
  81. 87.
    Ibid. Supra note 24 see hisThe Crisis of European Sciences and Transcendental Phenomenology, Evanston, Northwestern University Press, 1970 at 141.Google Scholar
  82. 88.
    Ibid. Supra note 24 see hisThe Crisis of European Sciences and Transcendental Phenomenology, Evanston, Northwestern University Press, 1970 at 141; and see Husserl’s critique of Kant’s logic inLogical Investigations, supra note 44 London, Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1970, at Vol. 1, 76.Google Scholar
  83. 89.
    Ibid., Logical Investigations, London, Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1970, Vol. 1, 88.Google Scholar
  84. 90.
    An Introduction to the Sociology of Law, Cambridge, Mass., Harvard University Press, 1939, ch. 1.Google Scholar
  85. 91.
    The Division of Labour in Society, translated by G. Simpson, New York, Macmillan and Co., 1933, book one.Google Scholar
  86. 92.
    Sociology of Law, London, Routledge, 1947.Google Scholar
  87. 93.
    For example, “… that phenomenological philosophy is most accurately conceived as criticism…” R. M. Zaner,supra note 20 at xii.Google Scholar
  88. 94.
    London, Heinemann, 1972.Google Scholar
  89. 95.
    Laurie Spurling,Phenomenology and the Social World, London, Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1977, 175.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1982

Authors and Affiliations

  • David Schiff
    • 1
  1. 1.London School of EconomicsLondonUK

Personalised recommendations