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

Results found: 8

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
Content available remote

Ideał legalności w koncepcji prawa Philipa Selznicka

100%
PL
Artykuł ma na celu rekonstrukcję głównych założeń teorii prawa Philipa Selznicka. Jak wskazuję, centralną pozycję w tej koncepcji zajmuje pojęcie legalności, rozumianej jako moralny ideał prawa. Legalność jest tu interpretowana w sposób niepozytywistyczny, jako dążenie do ograniczania arbitralności władzy i poszerzania rozumnej deliberacji. Ideał ten, bliski tradycji republikańskiej, wyznacza zakres odpowiedzialności i rolę prawa wobec wspólnoty politycznej. Taki pogląd jest istotny także w kontekście współczesnych polskich sporów dotyczących legitymizacji i autorytetu prawa.
EN
The paper aims at reconstruction of the basic tenets of Philip Selznick’s theory of law. The focal point of this theory is the concept of legality, which forms the moral ideal of law. Legality is interpreted here in a non-positivistic manner, as an aspiration to limit arbitrariness of power and to enhance reasonable deliberation. The ideal, which shows affinity with a republican tradition, determines the scope of responsibility and the role of law in a political community. Such a view is relevant, among others, in the context of the current Polish disputes about law’s legitimacy and authority.
EN
The study analyses a process of the social objectivisation of values within constitutional discourse. Doing this, it exposes both reasons underlying the process under study, as well as some threats it poses. For this sake, it distinguishes between the objectivity of law — a relevant and constantly present value of the European legal culture — and objectivisation as a social process which results in perceiving symbolic constructions as neutral objects of quasi-natural kind. Particularly in the realm of axiological reflection, objectivisation causes serious doubts as to its practical outcomes. As an alternative, the paper recommends a wider adoption of a dialectical type of discourse — the one presented by Aristotle and more recently by Chaim Perelman. Dialectical discourse is claimed to secure the role of objectivity in law, while acknowledging the specificities of axiological reflection.
PL
Tekst ma na celu rekonstrukcję i krytyczną polemikę z głównymi założeniami politycznej teorii orzekania, przedstawionej w pracy Rafała Mańki W stronę krytycznej filozofii orzekania. Polityczność, etyka, legitymizacja. Wykazuję kolejno, że: interpretacja kluczowego dla całej pracy pojęcia, jakim jest pojęcie polityczności, zostaje wybrana przez Mańkę w sposób ideologiczny i aprioryczny; wybór ten uniemożliwia realizację głównego celu książki, czyli legitymizację orzekania; realizacja proponowanej przez autora etyki orzekania jest (w świetle jego własnych założeń) zarówno mało prawdopodobna, jak i niezbyt pożądana. Wreszcie, z racji na totalny charakter krytyki, teoria ta nie jest zdolna odróżnić legitymowanego prawa od przemocy, a orzeczenia uzasadnionego od nieuzasadnionego. W konsekwencji, traci ona swoje krytyczne ostrze. Jak wskazuję, nie są to przypadłości wyjątkowe dla omawianej koncepcji, ale bardziej powszechne słabości różnych wariantów krytycznej teorii prawa.
EN
The paper aims at reconstruction and critical discussion with the main tenets of political theory of adjudication, as presented by Rafał Mańko in his book, W stronę krytycznej filozofii orzekania. Polityczność, etyka, legitymizacja [Towards a Critical Philosophy of Adjudication. The Political, Ethics, Legitimacy]. In the paper, I demonstrate: that the interpretation of the concept crucial for the entire theory – which is the concept of political – has been chosen by Mańko in an ideological and a priori manner; that the choice above effectively prevents the realisation of the main objective of the book, which is to legitimise adjudication; that the adoption of the ethics of adjudication advocated in the book is – in the light of the basic assumptions of that very publication – both improbable and hardly acceptable. Finally, I claim that Mańko’s theory, due to its totality, can distinguish neither between legitimate law and violence, nor between justified and unjustified adjudication. As a result, it loses its critical force. All these problems are not peculiar to Mańko’s theory, but they are general weaknesses of various versions of critical jurisprudence.
5
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Konstytucjonalizm jako refleksja

100%
PL
The objective of the paper is to present various forms of constitutionalism, with a special focus on constitutionalism understood as a form of reflection of political community. The paper adopts the perspective of reflexivity theory in order to reconstruct the basic alternatives in that regard, and also to reveal their potential advant ges and weaknesses. As it is demonstrated, it is precisely philosophical and sociological conceptions of reflexivity that are particularly suitable for understanding the specificities of constitutionalism – indeed, the latter, as a discourse about the foundations of the political and legal existence of a given community, inevitably assumes the form of reflection. The special focus within the paper is devoted to two key distinctions within the sphere of reflexivity theory, which impact the manner in which constitutional reflection is performed. The first of the distinctions concerns the relationship of reflection to tradition, while the second is done according to the criterion of the logical structure of reflexive cognizance. It is argued here that the dominant version of modern constitutionalism prescribes that constitutional reflexion be perceived as a closed process with the objective of emancipation from tradition. An alternative to this mainstream approach can be proposed in the form of capturing constitutionalism as reflexion with its foundation in tradition, at the same time dialogically mediated in other forms of social and political discourse.
6
100%
EN
The essay treats on a legal-theoretical project of ‘iuriscentrism’, proposed by Polish legal philosopher Artur Kozak. It begins with an exploration of theoretical and axiological foundations of this theory, which are, first and foremost, sociological institutionalism (as for a social ontology), philosophical transcendentalism (as for a theory of knowledge and action), and affirmative approach towards axiological foundations of the legal order. Subsequently, the article focuses on practical consequences of the above choices, which are a limitation of the judicial discretional power, and a unique way of legitimating the legal practice. According to iuriscentrism, the law is said to play a focal role in the contemporary, ethically pluralist and functionally differentiated societies; for those reasons a special approach to the legal order, the one termed as ‘a faith in law’ or ‘a patience to the law’, is necessarily required.
EN
The article aims to analyse legal constitutionalism and populist constitutionalism as two dominant ideological positions in the constitutional discourse of the last decades. The analysis is focused on the exemplifications of these positions in writings of selected Polish legal scholars, in the context of the Polish constitutional crisis of the rule of law, and conducted from the perspective of the philosophy of reflexivity. This theoretical and methodological approach enables demonstrating that the two examined doctrines – despite all the differences between them – share common erroneous assumptions regarding the relationships between law, democracy, and constitutional practice. Both of them strive to shape this practice in a closed-end and monological manner, subjected to one particular type of rationality. For legal constitutionalism, this will be juridical rationality, and for its populist counterpart – political rationality. This shared fallacy makes their ongoing dispute futile. An alternative approach to constitutionalism is to take into account the fundamental reflexivity of constitutional practice (regarded as the practice of creating, applying and interpreting a constitution, and of public debate on its text). In line with the general characteristics of reflexivity, constitutional practice appears as an open and pluralistic process, mediating between different viewpoints in society. Such an alternative is important not only when considering the Polish constitutional disputes, but also in the broader context of the contemporary crisis of liberal-democratic constitutional orders.
PL
Artykuł ma na celu analizę konstytucjonalizmu prawnego oraz konstytucjonalizmu populistycznego, jako dwóch dominujących stanowisk ideowych w dyskursie konstytucyjnym ostatnich dekad. Analiza jest prowadzona w kontekście polskiego kryzysu konstytucyjnego państwa prawa oraz z perspektywy filozofii refleksyjności. Takie podejście teoretyczne i metodologiczne pozwala wykazać, że dwa omawiane stanowiska – mimo zachodzących między nimi różnic – podzielają wspólne błędne założenia dotyczące relacji prawa, demokracji i praktyki konstytucyjnej. Oba bowiem dążą do ukształtowania tej praktyki na sposób zamknięty i monologiczny, poddany jednemu partykularnemu typowi racjonalności. Dla konstytucjonalizmu prawnego będzie to racjonalność jurydyczna, zaś dla jego populistycznego odpowiednika – racjonalność polityczna. Ten wspólny błąd sprawia, że trwający między nimi spór okazuje się jałowy. Alternatywą jest takie podejście do konstytucjonalizmu, które będzie uwzględniać zasadniczą refleksyjność praktyki konstytucyjnej (rozumianej jako praktyka tworzenia, stosowania i interpretowania konstytucji oraz publicznego debatowania o tym akcie). Zgodnie z ogólną charakterystyką refleksyjności, praktyka konstytucyjna przedstawia się wtedy jako proces otwarty, pluralistyczny i pośredniczący między różnymi społecznymi punktami widzenia. Taka alternatywa okazuje się istotna nie tylko w odniesieniu do polskich sporów konstytucyjnych, ale także w szerszym kontekście współczesnego kryzysu liberalno-demokratycznych porządków konstytucyjnych.
PL
The essay aims at analysis of the manner Polish jurisprudence perceives a role of critical perspective within legal thought. Only such critique might be plausibly called a reflection, since it is conducted from an internal point of view  the viewpoint of legal professionals who criticize their own conceptual schemes. This analysis of theoretical projects is made in the light of sociological processes of increasing reflexivity of social practices and institutions, law included (Giddens). The essay takes under examination four particular metaphors which are to be met in Polish jurisprudence: a lawyer as a philosopher, a lawyer as an artist, a lawyer as a participant of culture, and a lawyer as a believer. Each of them offers a slightly different answer to the question on the room for critical reflection in the law. The particular interest is paid to the way these four various theoretical proposals recognize, respectively: a significance of professional legal tradition, mutual relations between law and its social surroundings, as well as a role of individual agent in legal practice.
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.