Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Results found: 2

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
1
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Cognitive Theory of Metaphor and Jerzy Wróblewski's Concept of Legal Interpretation

100%
Zalewska M., Łódzki U.
Internetowy Magazyn Filozoficzny Hybris
|
2017
|
vol. 39 (4)
EN
Jerzy Wróblewski is one of the most prominent and influential legal theorists in Poland. His theory of legal interpretation containing a division into linguistic, systemic and functional dimension is highly regarded by Polish legal community. However, when formulating the theory Wróblewski was aware that his theory lacks some elements. In his work he points out that despite three dimensions the result of the interpretation is still unpredictable. For instance, interpreter’s personality might be additional factor influencing legal interpretation process. In this context, Wróblewski compares the lawmaker to a composer and a subject making legal interpretation to a musician performing a piece of music. Wróblewski emphasizes the importance of such factors. However, an interpreter should disregard additional factors in the process of legal interpretation. At the time, when Wróblewski formulated his theory, the cognitive science was not developed yet. Nowadays, Lakoff Johnson’s idea of conceptual metaphors is widely known and might be one of the missing elements Wróblewski had in mind. This paper will examine such possibility and its consequences. Firstly Wróblewski’s theory of legal interpretation will be presented. Next, I will move to a brief description of Lakoff-Johnson theory. Then, it will be discussed if such approach is possible in terms of Wróblewski’s theory. Finally, the necessary modification of legal interpretation theory will be analyzed. In this part, the key question is whether the metaphorical aspect is a new dimenson of legal interpretation.
2
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Historia pewnego przypisu. Próba rekonstrukcji dyskusji Hansa Kelsena z Jerzym Wróblewskim

100%
Zalewska M.
Archiwum Filozofii Prawa i Filozofii Społecznej
|
2011
|
vol. 1(2)
75-85
PL
Artykuł jest próbą rekonstrukcji dyskusji Hansa Kelsena z Jerzym Wróblewskim. Bazą dla artykułu są trzy przypisy z Ogólnej teorii norm Hansa Kelsena, w których autor ten rozważa takie kwestie jak znaczenie normy prawnej oraz interpretację prawa. Rekonstrukcja prowadzi do wniosku, że jeśli traktować argumentację Kelsena jako krytykę teorii Jerzego Wróblewskiego, to nie ma ona uzasadnionych podstaw, albowiem jej sednem nie jest wskazanie niespójności i słabości tejże teorii, ale jest ona prowadzona z punktu widzenia czystej teorii prawa, która sama cierpi niekiedy na brak spójności. Co za tym idzie proponuje się odmienne podejście do interpretacji tych przypisów, tj. traktowanie ich jak pewnego rodzaju naukowego świadectwa i jako narzędzia, które ma na celu udoskonalenie czystej teorii prawa. Co więcej, zauważyć należy, że Hans Kelsen interesował się nie tyle wątkami marksistowskimi obecnymi w teorii Jerzego Wróblewskiego, ale tymi jej elementami, które ze względu na ich wagę są po dziś dzień dyskutowane.
EN
Article is an attempt to provide reconstruction of the discourse between Hans Kelsen and Jerzy Wróblewski. The main motive of the article are three footnotes from Hans Kelsen’s General Theory of Norms where he considers such issues as the meaning of the legal norm, and legal interpretation. Reconstruction leads to conclusion that if one treats H. Kelsen’s argumentation as a critique of Jerzy Wróblewski’s theory, this critique doesn’t have sound basis, because it’s essence is not to point contradictions and weakness of the theory, but it is led from the point of view of pure theory of law which itself at some points suffers from the lack of coherency. Thus the other approach of the interpretation of footnotes is offered, to treat them as an some kind of scientific testimony, and as a tool which has on scope to make improvement in pure theory of law. Additionally it has been pointed out, that Hans Kelsen didn’t put the main interest on Marxist issues which occurred in Jerzy Wróblewski’s theory, but on those elements which have it’s importance and are discussed till present day.
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.