实证法学学者最擅长的事

Q2 Social Sciences Temple Law Review Pub Date : 2015-03-23 DOI:10.2139/SSRN.2584177
Robert M. Lawless
{"title":"实证法学学者最擅长的事","authors":"Robert M. Lawless","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2584177","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This Essay, prepared for the symposium honoring the work of Professor Bill Whitford, makes the claim that empirical legal scholars have strengths as compared to scholars from other disciplines who also do socio-legal scholarship. Most significantly, empirical legal scholars have an in-depth knowledge of fine-grained institutional detail that can unlock knowledge that otherwise might remain hidden – Whitford’s work provides several examples. Empirical legal scholars also will tend to write about the legal system as such, helping us understand how the legal system works. Empirical legal scholars identify topics others might miss and often write scholarship that connects with policy makers. The claim here is not that empirical legal scholars are somehow “better” – indeed empirical legal scholars also have weaknesses. Rather, the claim is only that empirical legal scholars produce scholarship that is different, scholarship that expands our knowledge of how the world works, and hence scholarship that is useful.","PeriodicalId":53568,"journal":{"name":"Temple Law Review","volume":"87 1","pages":"711-724"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-03-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2139/SSRN.2584177","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"What Empirical Legal Scholars Do Best\",\"authors\":\"Robert M. Lawless\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/SSRN.2584177\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This Essay, prepared for the symposium honoring the work of Professor Bill Whitford, makes the claim that empirical legal scholars have strengths as compared to scholars from other disciplines who also do socio-legal scholarship. Most significantly, empirical legal scholars have an in-depth knowledge of fine-grained institutional detail that can unlock knowledge that otherwise might remain hidden – Whitford’s work provides several examples. Empirical legal scholars also will tend to write about the legal system as such, helping us understand how the legal system works. Empirical legal scholars identify topics others might miss and often write scholarship that connects with policy makers. The claim here is not that empirical legal scholars are somehow “better” – indeed empirical legal scholars also have weaknesses. Rather, the claim is only that empirical legal scholars produce scholarship that is different, scholarship that expands our knowledge of how the world works, and hence scholarship that is useful.\",\"PeriodicalId\":53568,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Temple Law Review\",\"volume\":\"87 1\",\"pages\":\"711-724\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2015-03-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2139/SSRN.2584177\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Temple Law Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2584177\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Temple Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2584177","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

这篇文章是为纪念比尔·惠特福德教授的工作而准备的,它声称,与从事社会法律研究的其他学科的学者相比,经验主义法律学者具有优势。最重要的是,实证法律学者对细粒度的制度细节有深入的了解,可以解开原本可能隐藏的知识——Whitford的工作提供了几个例子。经验主义法律学者也倾向于这样写法律体系,帮助我们理解法律体系是如何运作的。经验主义法律学者发现了其他人可能忽略的话题,并经常撰写与政策制定者相关的学术论文。这里的主张并不是说经验主义法律学者在某种程度上“更好”——事实上,经验主义法律学者也有弱点。更确切地说,这种说法只是说,经验主义的法律学者产生了与众不同的学术成果,这种学术成果扩展了我们对世界如何运作的认识,因此是有用的学术成果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
What Empirical Legal Scholars Do Best
This Essay, prepared for the symposium honoring the work of Professor Bill Whitford, makes the claim that empirical legal scholars have strengths as compared to scholars from other disciplines who also do socio-legal scholarship. Most significantly, empirical legal scholars have an in-depth knowledge of fine-grained institutional detail that can unlock knowledge that otherwise might remain hidden – Whitford’s work provides several examples. Empirical legal scholars also will tend to write about the legal system as such, helping us understand how the legal system works. Empirical legal scholars identify topics others might miss and often write scholarship that connects with policy makers. The claim here is not that empirical legal scholars are somehow “better” – indeed empirical legal scholars also have weaknesses. Rather, the claim is only that empirical legal scholars produce scholarship that is different, scholarship that expands our knowledge of how the world works, and hence scholarship that is useful.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Temple Law Review
Temple Law Review Social Sciences-Law
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: Temple Law Review is a student-edited scholarly journal that publishes four issues per year with a circulation of approximately 1,500 copies per issue. The Law Review staff is dedicated to providing a forum for the expression of new legal thought and scholarly commentary on important developments, trends, and issues in the law. Each issue contains articles written by judges, legal scholars, or practitioners, as well as recent notes and comments written by members of the Law Review staff.
期刊最新文献
POLICY POLARIZATION AND DEATH IN THE UNITED STATES. What Empirical Legal Scholars Do Best The Corporation as a Tocquevillian Association Rethinking Gender Equality in the Legal Profession's Pipeline to Power: A Study on Media Coverage of Supreme Court Nominees (Phase I, the Introduction Week) Hippocrates to HIPAA: a foundation for a federal physician-patient privilege.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1