|
|
Legitimization of Law by Jűrgen Habermas and Niklas Luhmann
Mucala, Václav ; Šamánek, Jan (advisor) ; Grznár, Miroslav (referee)
This article is comparation of sociological theories of Niklas Luhmann and Jürgen Habermas, specifically by their relation to law and the way it acquires its justification in society. The key difference of both attitudes is result of different approaches to concepts of system. Jürgen Habermas holds concept of open system and it makes him to think about law as institutionalization of communicative racionality of lifeworld. Theory of Niklas Luhmann shifts to the concept of closed system an it characterizes las as institution which lives its own life normatively closed to social enviroment. Comparsion of both theories by legitimity of law leads us to ask about their relation to positivistic concepts and the concepts of natural law. We argue that sociology of Law presented by Jürgen Habermas has its similarities with natural law concepts and autopoietic law of Niklas Luhmann has much in common with legal positivism. In spite of both has different attitude to rationalization of law, they describe legitimization of law in terms of procedure. Finally we argue, that there is possibility to find common elements and that those theories can understand each other.
|
|
|
Identity, time and law
Mucala, Václav ; Agha, Petr (advisor) ; Kosek, Jan (referee)
Time is epistemoligical problem. As such it has its relevance within quetsions of law, legitimity of law and its social recognition. Subject of law or subject under the law can be a human being. In language of George Herbert Mead we can speak about crossing of temproal perspectives and construction of institutions and related identites by taking on the perspective of generalized other. On the next level of theoretical abstraction it is possible to speak about operatively closed and functionally differentiated systemic communication as an epistemic subject itself. Human identity in such notion is dissolved in plurality of communicatioun discourses and with relevance to law it could be concieved as semantic artefact created by legal communication. Within such theoretical frame it is possible to speak about identity of law based on operative closure with its own dynamics and temporality. Diploma thesis takes into consideration popular notion of fast societal change and speed up of institutional transformation. With relation to first, more theoretical part it follows arguments about threat to democracy caused by disappearance of latencies in decision making and shortening of time for intersubjectivity. Trust and strong civic society is described as necessity in lowering of transaction cost within...
|
|
|
Legitimization of Law by Jűrgen Habermas and Niklas Luhmann
Mucala, Václav ; Šamánek, Jan (advisor) ; Grznár, Miroslav (referee)
This article is comparation of sociological theories of Niklas Luhmann and Jürgen Habermas, specifically by their relation to law and the way it acquires its justification in society. The key difference of both attitudes is result of different approaches to concepts of system. Jürgen Habermas holds concept of open system and it makes him to think about law as institutionalization of communicative racionality of lifeworld. Theory of Niklas Luhmann shifts to the concept of closed system an it characterizes las as institution which lives its own life normatively closed to social enviroment. Comparsion of both theories by legitimity of law leads us to ask about their relation to positivistic concepts and the concepts of natural law. We argue that sociology of Law presented by Jürgen Habermas has its similarities with natural law concepts and autopoietic law of Niklas Luhmann has much in common with legal positivism. In spite of both has different attitude to rationalization of law, they describe legitimization of law in terms of procedure. Finally we argue, that there is possibility to find common elements and that those theories can understand each other.
|
guest ::
