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

Results found: 4

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  CIRCULARITY
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
1

DUMMETT O KRUHOVOSTI PRI ARGUMENTOVANÍ

100%
Čana T.
Filozofia (Philosophy)
|
2018
|
vol. 73
|
issue 6
469 – 480
EN
This paper deals with the distinction between two roles of a deductive argument in the communication: explanatory and suasive. The distinction was hinted out by Michael Dummett, in his Justification of deduction. The paper attempts to show various controversial consequences of the distinction. For example, there is a belief that, regarding the arguments used in the explanatory mode, obvious threat of circularity is not in fact “interesting”. Quite the opposite, it seems to be something natural. The aim of the paper is to critically reconsider the distinction between the roles of a deductive argument as well as its consequences.
2

VIAZANOSŤ ŠTÁTU VLASTNÝM PRÁVOM

100%
Bárány E.
Právny obzor. Teoretický časopis pre otázky štátu a práva (Juridical Review. Theoretical journal for the questions of state and law)
|
2013
|
vol. 96
|
issue 6
567 – 581
EN
The obligation of a state to respect its own law is a key tenant of concepts of Rechtsstaat and rule of law. It contains an element of circularity, because it means the application of law on its creator, the state. The article analyzes this example of circularity using the concept of law as an autopoietic system elaborated particularly in the Works of G. Teubner. The presupposition of meaningful application of majority of circularity forms is redefinition of law as a social subsystem. Circularity is found on the level of “great systems” of law and “state”, but only in a very limited extent in relations between individual legal rules and public authorities. The operate closeness of law as an autopoitic system id broken by content of legal system and especially by its values.
3

CIRKULARITA V PRÁVE

86%
Bárány E.
Právny obzor. Teoretický časopis pre otázky štátu a práva (Juridical Review. Theoretical journal for the questions of state and law)
|
2012
|
vol. 95
|
issue 2
109 – 124
EN
There are three kinds of circularity in legal systems: 1. Avoidable mistake of a legal regulation, when two or more legal norms refer mutually to each other. This situation is relatively common in times of legal (including constitutional) pluralism. 2. Complex system of mutual but mediated references and of „legal regulation of law“ (secondary rules). This kind of circularity is necessary in any developed legal system. 3. Rule of recognition is unavoidably a self-applying one. It is self-application results in a paradox and regres ad infinitim. It is a proof of necessity of some extralegal starting point for any legal system. The circulartiy forms one of the central tenants of autopoietic concept of legal system, but it is not only necessary for any developed legal system, it relativizes the ideas of (operative) closure of legal system because it shows the necessity of some extrolegal „starting point“ and continual base for any legal system.
4

THE STRUCTURE OF NIKLAS LUHMANN'S THEORY

72%
Brunczel B.
Tarsadalomkutatas (Social Science Research)
|
2007
|
vol. 25
|
issue 3
297-320
EN
There are more factors that make especially difficult to understand Niklas Luhmann's theory of society, e.g. its extraordinarily abstract and at the same time unusual language, some theoretical decisions that are surprising in the light of sociological tradition and the complicated interdependence between the parts of his theory. All of these can imply the danger of misinterpretation. In his paper the author endeavours to give an interpretative framework that through exploring the structure of Luhmann's theory and through revealing the efforts for theory-constitution lying behind it contributes to the elimination of these difficulties.The assumption underlying this is that the strange and un-understandable points of his theory are strange and un-understandable only separately, but if we reveal the inherent interdependences of Luhmann's theory and the inducements of its elaboration then all of them will lose these unusual characters. In fact Luhmann's theoretical efforts and theory-constituting aims are those things that in consequence of their grandiosity and radicalism are unusual in the field of social sciences; and the real key to the resolution of strangeness and un-understandability is to understand these efforts and aims. The author is going to perform this task by means of exploring five questions, i.e. analyzing (1) Luhmann's theoretical aim, (2) the circularity of his theory, (3) the abstraction levels of his theory, (4) the explanative power of his theory and (5) his theory's relation to philosophy. His paper's aim is not to defend or to criticize this theory; he will leave the questions concerning its assessment unanswered. What he would like to reach is that we leave the right questions unanswered.
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.