Zoekresultaat: 26 artikelen

x
Artikel

Bounding Border Checks

A Comparative Approach to Crimmigration, Race, and Policing at the US Internal Border

Tijdschrift Crimmigratie & Recht, Aflevering 1 2021
Trefwoorden Border checks, US International Border, US Border Patrol, Schengen area
Auteurs David Hamburger
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Crimmigration – the hybridization of criminal law and migration policy – is a transatlantic phenomenon. Despite this growing recognition, however, academic attention has thus far tended to focus more on discrete cases than on the similarities across regional contexts. In considering internal checkpoint stops conducted by US Border Patrol within the context of ongoing debates about racial profiling and policing of the internal border in the Schengen area, this article aims to provide a comparative lens by which to assess the questions at the heart of the current European discussion. An examination of both the jurisprudence and practice of the US internal border, this comparison suggests, offers a cautionary tale for European attempts to balance the fight against cross-border crime with the principles of human rights and the promise of a Europe free of internal frontiers.


David Hamburger
D.J. Hamburger LLM is a recent LLM graduate of the Europa Instituut at Leiden Law School, where he was an NAF-Fulbright fellow.
Artikel

Access_open Art, Science and the Poetry of Justice – ­Pragmatist Aesthetics and Its Importance for Law and Legal Education

Special Issue on Pragmatism and Legal Education ­Sanne Taekema & Thomas Riesthuis (eds.)

Tijdschrift Law and Method, maart 2021
Trefwoorden legal research, legal education, epistemology, law, science and art
Auteurs Wouter de Been
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Classic pragmatists like John Dewey entertained an encompassing notion of science. This pragmatic belief in the continuities between a scientific, ethical and cultural understanding of the world went into decline in the middle of the 20th century. To many mid-century American and English philosophers it suggested a simplistic faith that philosophy and science could address substantive questions about values, ethics and aesthetics in a rigorous way. This critique of classic pragmatism has lost some of its force in the last few decades with the rise of neo-pragmatism, but it still has a hold over disciplines like economics and law. In this article I argue that this criticism of pragmatism is rooted in a narrow conception of what science entails and what philosophy should encompass. I primarily focus on one facet: John Dewey’s work on art and aesthetics. I explain why grappling with the world aesthetically, according to Dewey, is closely related to dealing with it scientifically, for instance, through the poetic and aesthetic development of metaphors and concepts to come to terms with reality. This makes his theory of art relevant, I argue, not only to studying and understanding law, but also to teaching law.


Wouter de Been
Wouter de Been is a legal theorist who has written widely on pragmatism and legal realism. I would like to thank the reviewers for their comments. Their critical commentary made this a much better article. Any remaining shortcomings are of course my own. I dedicate this article to the memory of Willem Witteveen, who always saw the art in law.
Artikel

Politiewetenschappers en hun taboes

Een pleidooi voor geestverruimende beschouwingen

Tijdschrift PROCES, Aflevering 1-2 2021
Trefwoorden police, research
Auteurs Dr. Guus Meershoek en Prof. dr. Janine Janssen
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    The authors have taken a contribution from Frank Bovenkerk from 2003 as a starting point. In this text, Bovenkerk reflects on taboos in criminology. In science, in addition to independence, focus on truth-finding, a willingness to self-correct and organized skepticism, courage is also an important quality. Where Bovenkerk focuses more broadly on criminology, this contribution focuses in particular on taboos and requirements for scientists in police research.


Dr. Guus Meershoek
Dr. Guus Meershoek is als lector Politiegeschiedenis verbonden aan de Politieacademie. Daarnaast is hij universitair docent aan de Universiteit van Twente, waar hij zich bezighoudt met onderzoek naar maatschappelijke veiligheidszorg.

Prof. dr. Janine Janssen
Prof. dr. Janine Janssen is hoofd onderzoek van het Landelijk Expertise Centrum Eer Gerelateerd Geweld van de Nationale Politie, lector Veiligheid in Afhankelijkheidsrelaties aan Avans Hogeschool, bijzonder hoogleraar Rechts­antropologie aan de Open Universiteit en voorzitter van de redactie van PROCES.
Artikel

Waarom dronepiloten toch in no fly zones vliegen

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift voor Toezicht, Aflevering 3-4 2020
Trefwoorden drones, weerstand, toezicht, regelgeving, gedrag
Auteurs Stephanie Wassenburg, Tess Beke, Han Pret e.a.
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Een scherpe stijging in het aantal drones en snelle vorderingen in dronetechnologie creëren nieuwe mogelijkheden en risico’s voor veiligheid en privacy. Door een beperkte toezichtcapaciteit is er behoefte aan gedragsinterventies die spontane naleving stimuleren. Het huidige onderzoek beschrijft psychologische factoren, zoals weerstand, die het regelnalevingsgedrag van dronepiloten beïnvloeden omtrent vliegen in no fly zones (gebieden waar men niet met een drone mag vliegen). De gemodelleerde antwoorden van 843 dronepiloten laten zien dat twee typen weerstand, inertie en scepticisme, invloed hebben op het gedrag van dronepiloten. Dit artikel beschrijft hoe deze inzichten door toezichthouders kunnen worden gebruikt om gewenst gedrag te bevorderen.


Stephanie Wassenburg
Dr. S.I. Wassenburg is gedragsonderzoeker/data scientist bij de Inspectie Leefomgeving & Transport, Ministerie van Infrastructuur en Waterstaat.

Tess Beke
T.J. Beke, MSc is promovenda bij het Behavioural Science Institute, Radboud Universiteit Nijmegen.

Han Pret
J. Pret, EMoC is senior adviseur bij de Inspectie Leefomgeving & Transport, Ministerie van Infrastructuur en Waterstaat.

Barbara Müller
Dr. B.C.N Müller is universitair docent bij het Behavioural Science Institute, Radboud Universiteit Nijmegen.
Artikel

Access_open Teaching Comparative Law, Pragmatically (Not Practically)

Special Issue on Pragmatism and Legal Education, Sanne Taekema & Thomas Riesthuis (eds.)

Tijdschrift Law and Method, oktober 2020
Trefwoorden comparative legal studies, legal education, pragmatism
Auteurs Alexandra Mercescu
Auteursinformatie

Alexandra Mercescu
Alexandra Mercescu, Ph.D is lecturer at the Department of Public Law, University of Timisoara, Romania.
Artikel

Access_open Restraint as a Source of Judicial ‘Apoliticality’

A Functional Reconstruction

Tijdschrift Netherlands Journal of Legal Philosophy, Aflevering 2 2020
Trefwoorden Urgenda, Miller v. Secretary of State, Norm of judicial apoliticality, Ronald Dworkin, Judicial restraint
Auteurs Maurits Helmich
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Few legal theorists today would argue that the domain of law exists in isolation from other normative spheres governing society, notably from the domain of ‘politics’. Nevertheless, the implicit norm that judges should not act ‘politically’ remains influential and widespread in the debates surrounding controversial court cases. This article aims to square these two observations. Taking the Miller v. Secretary of State and Urgenda cases as illustrative case studies, the article demonstrates that what it means for judges to adjudicate cases ‘apolitically’ is itself a matter of controversy. In reflecting on their own constitutional role, courts are forced to take a stance on substantive questions of political philosophy. Nevertheless, that does not mean that the ‘norm of judicial apoliticality’ should therefore be rejected. The norm’s coherence lies in its intersocial function: its role in declaring certain modes of judicial interpretation and intervention legitimate (‘legal’/‘judicial’) or illegitimate (‘political’).


Maurits Helmich
Maurits Helmich is promovendus aan de afdeling Sociologie, Theorie en Methodologie van het Recht aan de Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam.
Artikel

Hoger beroep in het bestuursrecht: massaal gebruik, ontevreden gebruikers

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 2 2017
Trefwoorden Satisfaction, Appeals procedure, Administrative law
Auteurs Professor Bert Marseille, Dr. Barbara Brink en Mr. dr. Martje Boekema
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In administrative law, a substantial number of citizens who are dissatisfied with government decisions go on to appeal their decision at a higher court. This article discusses how satisfied those appellants are about the procedure and the result.
    The data presented demonstrate a substantial difference in appreciation of the procedure between winners and losers. In addition, many appellants experience a very low degree of distributive justice. In part, people show a fundamental distrust in the administration of justice, but for a greater part, people argue that the higher court judge has not assessed their case in an expert or fair way.
    The most intriguing outcomes of the analysis concern the large majority, including both winners and losers, that claim that the verdict did not end the conflict with the counterparty. Additionally, almost everyone argues that they would file an appeal again, if presented with that possibility. The experienced dissatisfaction, skepticism and frustration regarding the procedure seem to have little or no influence on the willingness to return to the administrative higher court in the future.


Professor Bert Marseille
Bert Marseille is hoogleraar bestuurskunde, in het bijzonder de empirische bestudering van het bestuursrecht, bij de vakgroep Staatsrecht, Bestuursrecht en Bestuurskunde van de Rijksuniversiteit Groningen.

Dr. Barbara Brink
Barbara Brink is docent bij de vakgroep Staatsrecht, Bestuursrecht en Bestuurskunde van de Rijksuniversiteit Groningen en coördineert de master Juridische bestuurskunde.

Mr. dr. Martje Boekema
Martje Boekema is universitair docent Staats- en Bestuursrecht bij de Universiteit Utrecht. Haar onderzoek richt zich op de (bestuurs)rechtspraak en geschilbeslechting.
Artikel

Amerikaans rechtsrealisme en empirisch-juridisch onderzoek

Tijdschrift Justitiële verkenningen, Aflevering 6 2016
Trefwoorden American Legal Realism, Empirical Legal Studies, New Deal Policy, Research program, Lakatos
Auteurs Prof. dr. F.L. Leeuw
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    The American Legal Realism movement, which originated in the beginning of the twentieth century and was active until the Fifties, can be seen as one of the founders of current Empirical Legal Studies because of the importance it attached to social scientific knowledge on behavior of – for instance – judges and others involved in the judiciary. The author sketches several characteristics of Legal Realism at that time. Exploring their range of thought he also examines whether Legal Realism’s studies can be seen as a research program. The recent emergence of New Legal Realism in the US and elsewhere leads to the question what characterizes this (re)new(al) movement. Finally it is argued that American Legal Realism especially contributed to scientific progress by posing new questions, changing focus and by stressing the importance of empirical evidence.


Prof. dr. F.L. Leeuw
Prof. dr. Frans Leeuw is directeur van het Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek- en Documentatiecentrum van het ministerie van Veiligheid en Justitie en daarnaast hoogleraar Recht, openbaar bestuur en sociaal-wetenschappelijk onderzoek aan de Universiteit Maastricht.
Artikel

The precaution controversy: an analysis through the lens of Ulrich Beck and Michel Foucault

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 3 2016
Trefwoorden Precautionary principle, risk society, governmentality, risk governance, environmental law
Auteurs Tobias Arnoldussen
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    According to the precautionary principle lack of scientific evidence for the existence of a certain (environmental) risk should not be a reason not to take preventative policy measures. The precautionary principle had a stormy career in International environmental law and made its mark on many treaties, including the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). However it remains controversial. Proponents see it as the necessary legal curb to keep the dangerous tendencies of industrial production and technology in check. Opponents regard it with suspicion. They fear it will lead to a decrease in freedom and fear the powers to intervene that it grants the state. In this article the principle is reviewed from the perspectives of Ulrich Beck’s ‘reflexive modernisation’ and Michel Foucault’s notion of governmentality. It is argued that from Beck’s perspective the precautionary principle is the result of a learning process in which mankind gradually comes to adopt a reflexive attitude to the risks modernity has given rise to. It represents the wish to devise more inclusive and democratic policies on risks and environmental hazards. From the perspective of Michel Foucault however, the principle is part and parcel of neo-liberal tendencies of responsibilisation. Risk management and prudency are devolved to the public in an attempt to minimise risk taking, while at the same time optimising production. Moreover, it grants legitimacy to state intervention if the public does not live up to the responsibilities foisted on it. Both perspectives are at odds, but represent different sides of the same coin and might learn from each other concerns.


Tobias Arnoldussen
Tobias Arnoldussen is a socio-legal scholar affiliated with the University of Amsterdam Law School and the PPLE honours college. Next to lecturing on a variety of subjects, he focusses on interdisciplinary legal research into the possibilities of law to deal with contemporary social problems.
Artikel

Opinio juris as epistème: A constructivist approach to the use of contested concepts in legal doctrine

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 3 2016
Trefwoorden Opinio juris, Interpretive concepts, Customary law, Constructivism, Pierre Bourdieu, Peter Berger & Thomas Luckmann
Auteurs Associate Professor Olaf Tans
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Seeing that the role of opinio juris in the identification of customary international law is essentially contested, this contribution seeks to explain how this concept plays a fruitful role in legal doctrine despite of, or perhaps even due to, this essential contestedness. To that effect the paper adopts a constructivist perspective, primarily drawing from Bourdieu’s theory of practice and Berger & Luckmann’s ideas about institutionalization. In this perspective, contested concepts such as opinio juris are conceived of as multifaceted tools of knowledge production in the hands of members of epistemic communities.


Associate Professor Olaf Tans
Olaf Tans works as legal philosopher and political scientist at Amsterdam University College and the Centre for the Politics of Transnational Law. His contribution to this special issue is part of a research line focusing on the social construction of normativity in legal doctrine. He has also published about constitutionalism, citizenship, democracy, and most recently (e.g. in Ratio Juris and Law & Literature) about the use of foundational narratives in public deliberation and law-finding.

    The paper aims at justifying an interpretation of Dworkin’s theory of Law as Integrity that brings it closer to philosophical pragmatism despite his rejection of legal pragmatism. In order to achieve this aim, this work employs a classification of philosophical commitments that define pragmatism in a broad and in a narrow sense and shows that legal pragmatism follows the main thinkers of pragmatism in the narrow sense in committing to instrumentalism. The attribution of a pragmatist character to Dworkin’s theory of law rests on the idea that the adoption of a commitment to instrumentalism is not implicated by its adoption of other pragmatist commitments.


Thiago Lopes Decat
Thiago Lopes Decat, Ph.D., is Adjunct Professor at the Department of Propedeutic and Critical Disciplines of the Faculdade de Direito Milton Campos, Nova Lima, Brazil.

    When discussing O. W. Holmes’s answer to the question What constitutes the law? Morton White underlines the fact that Holmes’s inquiry didn’t focus on developing the concept of law. White states: '…Holmes said little in The Path of the Law about the notion of legal authority, perhaps because he was interested not in what he called a "useless quintessence of all legal systems" but in "an accurate anatomy of one"'. Such ambition (or lack of ambition) is characteristic of many pragmatic enterprises in the field of jurisprudence. However, sometimes the opposition between legal pragmatism and other legal theories is built upon a reference to the notion of the 'nature' or 'essence' of law. Many legal philosophers who aim to reveal the very 'nature of law' (or 'the concept of law' as H. L. A. Hart did) try to interpret Holmes and other pragmatists as offering a competitive view to their own. I will follow White’s early intuition that such a construal of the controversy is simply wrong. Afterwards I will sketch a portrait of legal pragmatism in the context of White’s own inquiry and his version of 'holistic pragmatism'; thirdly, I will present in brief the main reasons for exploring the concept of law in the contemporary analytic philosophy of law. Then I will show that traditionally 'pragmatic' and 'analytic' efforts in legal theory are situated on different levels of generality and conceptuality. However, these efforts can be, at least to some extent, reordered under the aegis of holistic pragmatism.


Adam Michał Dyrda
Adjunct Professor, Department of Legal Theory, Faculty of Law, Jagiellonian University, Cracow, Poland. Contact: adam.dyrda@uj.edu.pl; http://jagiellonian.academia.edu/AdamDyrda.
Artikel

Biases in toezicht: wat zijn het en hoe kunnen we ermee omgaan?

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift voor Toezicht, Aflevering 1 2015
Trefwoorden biases, psychologie
Auteurs drs. Remy Jansen RO CIA en Mr. dr. Margot Aelen
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    De auteurs gaan in op de vraag hoe het kan dat toezichthouders risico’s niet zien, risico’s onderschatten of te laat ingrijpen om risico’s te verminderen. Dit hoeft niet altijd voort te komen uit een gebrek aan deskundigheid, professionaliteit of kennis. Psychologische processen kunnen de effectiviteit van het toezicht ondermijnen, zonder dat de toezichthouder het merkt. De effecten van zogenoemde biases mogen niet worden onderschat.


drs. Remy Jansen RO CIA
Drs. R.M. Jansen RO CIA is afdelingshoofd thematisch toezicht integriteit bij DNB.

Mr. dr. Margot Aelen
Mr. dr. M. Aelen is toezichthouder specialist bij DNB en redactielid van Tijdschrift voor Toezicht.
Artikel

Ethische dilemma’s bij criminologisch onderzoek

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift over Cultuur & Criminaliteit, Aflevering 1 2015
Trefwoorden Ethical issues, Scientific integrity, Confidentiality, Informed consent, Fabrication and falsification, Ethical commissions
Auteurs Prof. dr. Henk van de Bunt
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Recent years have seen a growing interest in scientific malpractice. In the Netherlands, for example, several major cases of plagiarism, fabrication of data and falsification of findings have come to light. The scandal surrounding the Dutch social psychologist Diederik Stapel, who simply made up the results of empirical research, prompted worldwide attention. As a result of these scandals, universities have, in the past few years, increased their efforts to better ensure the integrity of scientific research. In this process it is sometimes overlooked that scientific integrity is not a clear-cut concept. By examining three ethical issues relevant to criminological research, this article aims to illustrate that the assessment of integrity is a complicated matter. The first dilemma relates to maintaining confidentiality: how to ensure that the privacy of respondents is protected and the research will not harm their interests? The second dilemma has to do with the degree of openness and transparency required from the viewpoint of scientific accountability. How transparent can one be when it comes to conducting scientific research based on secret information and closed sources that are only accessible to the researchers? Finally, the third dilemma concerns the independent position of criminological research. What are the possibilities and limitations of free and independent research in the field of criminology?


Prof. dr. Henk van de Bunt
Prof. dr. H.G. (Henk) van de Bunt is hoogleraar criminologie aan de Erasmus School of Law, Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam.

Laura Carballo Piñeiro
Associate Professor at the Faculty of Law, University of Santiago de Compostela.

Xandra Kramer
Professor at Erasmus School of Law, Erasmus University Rotterdam, visiting scholar at Stanford Law School.
Artikel

The government’s roles in transnational forest governance

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 3 2014
Trefwoorden transnational governance, forest certification, legality verification, emerging economies, public-private interaction
Auteurs Liu Jing
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Forest certification schemes and the legality regime are two main methods of transnational forest governance. A recent review of the literature has revealed that the government and forest certification are often intertwined. Based on that review, this contribution argues that governments play divergent roles in forest certification schemes in different aspects of the regulatory process: namely, agenda and standard setting, implementation, monitoring, and enforcement. In most FSC schemes, governments in developed countries play a less active role in most of these aspects than they do in context-based industry-dominated schemes. In the three emerging economies examined – Indonesia, Brazil, and China – the government sometimes plays a more active role in context-based, industry-dominated schemes than it does in developed countries. The rising legality regime might further strengthen the role of the government in forest governance in these emerging economies. Moreover, China may exemplify the fact that forest governance is entering a new phase, because the country not only exports to countries demanding legal verification, but also imports from countries where the risk of illegal logging is high. This illustrates that the role of governments in forest governance is constantly evolving.


Liu Jing
Liu Jing is a postdoctoral researcher in Erasmus University Rotterdam (the Netherlands). She is conducting research on ‘smart mixes in relation to transboundary environmental problems’, especially in the areas of forest, fishery, oil and climate change governance. Her research interests cover regulation and governance, environmental law as well as law and economics.
Artikel

Access_open Racial Profiling and the Presumption of Innocence

Tijdschrift Netherlands Journal of Legal Philosophy, Aflevering 1 2014
Trefwoorden racial profiling, stop-and-frisk, presumption of innocence, communicative theories of criminal law, social inequality and criminal law
Auteurs Peter DeAngelis
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    I argue that a compelling way to articulate what is wrong with racial profiling in policing is to view racial profiling as a violation of the presumption of innocence. I discuss the communicative nature of the presumption of innocence as an expression of social trust and a protection against the social condemnation of being undeservingly investigated, prosecuted, and convicted for committing a crime. I argue that, given its communicative dimension, failures to extend the presumption of innocence are an expression of disrespect. I take the New York Police Department’s stop-and-frisk policy as an example of racial profiling and argue that its use of race-based forms of suspicion as reasons for making stops is a violation of the presumption of innocence. I maintain that this systemic failure to extend the presumption of innocence to profiled groups reveals the essentially disrespectful nature of the NYPD policy.


Peter DeAngelis
Peter DeAngelis is Ph.D. Candidate in Philosophy at Villanova University.
Artikel

Access_open Skeptical Legal Education

How to Develop a Critical Attitude?

Tijdschrift Law and Method, 2013
Trefwoorden academic learning, skepticism, Oakeshott, judgment, Critique
Auteurs Bart van Klink en Bald de Vries
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Law teachers at the university want students to develop a critical attitude. But what exactly does it mean to be critical and why is it important to be critical? How can a critical attitude be promoted? In this article we intend to elucidate the role that critical thinking may play in legal education. We will introduce the idea of skeptical legal education, which is to a large extent based on Michael Oakeshott’s understanding of liberal learning but which relativizes its insistence on the non-instrumentality of learning and reinforces its critical potential. Subsequently, the article presents a teaching experiment, where students, based on self-organization, study and discuss basic texts in order to encourage critical thinking.


Bart van Klink
Bart van Klink is professor of Legal Methodology at VU University Amsterdam and head of the Department of Legal Theory and Legal History at VU University Amsterdam.

Bald de Vries
Ulbaldus de Vries is lecturer of Legal Theory at the Department of administrative and constitutional law and jurisprudence at the Faculty of law, Utrecht University. He is a founding-member of the Working Group on Reflexive Modernisation and Law.
Article

Access_open At the Crossroads of National and European Union Law. Experiences of National Judges in a Multi-level Legal Order

Tijdschrift Erasmus Law Review, Aflevering 3/4 2013
Trefwoorden national judges, legal pluralism, application of EU law, legal consciousness, supremacy and direct effect of EU law
Auteurs Urszula Jaremba Ph.D.
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    The notion and theory of legal pluralism have been witnessing an increasing interest on part of scholars. The theory that originates from the legal anthropological studies and is one of the major topical streams in the realm of socio-legal studies slowly but steady started to become a point of departure for other disciplines. Unavoidably it has also gained attention from the scholars in the realm of the law of the European Union. It is the aim of the present article to illustrate the legal reality in which the law of the Union and the national laws coexist and intertwine with each other and, subsequently, to provide some insight on the manner national judges personally construct their own understanding of this complex legal architecture and the problems they come across in that respect. In that sense, the present article not only illustrates the new, pluralistic legal environment that came into being with the founding of the Communities, later the European Union, but also adds another dimension to this by presenting selected, empirical data on how national judges in several Member States of the EU individually perceive, adapt to, experience and make sense of this reality of overlapping and intertwining legal orders. Thus, the principal aim of this article is to illustrate how the pluralistic legal system works in the mind of a national judge and to capture the more day-to-day legal reality by showing how the law works on the ground through the lived experiences of national judges.


Urszula Jaremba Ph.D.
Urszula Jaremba, PhD, assistant professor at the Department of European Union Law, School of Law, Erasmus University Rotterdam. I am grateful to the editors of this Special Issue: Prof. Dr. Sanne Taekema and Dr. Wibo van Rossum as well as to the two anonymous reviewers for their useful comments. I am also indebted to Dr. Tobias Nowak for giving me his consent to use the data concerning the Dutch and German judges in this article. This article is mostly based on a doctoral research project that resulted in a doctoral manuscript titled ‘Polish Civil Judges as European Union Law Judges: Knowledge, Experiences and Attitudes’, defended on the 5th of October 2012.
Artikel

Access_open The Role of Hierarchy, Example, and Language in Learning

A Confrontation between a Liberal and a ‘Critical’ Understanding of Legal Education

Tijdschrift Law and Method, 2013
Trefwoorden skeptical legal education, academic learning, Critique, Knowledge, CLS, liberalism, power
Auteurs Bart van Klink
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In The Voice of Liberal Learning, Michael Oakeshott characterizes learning as a strictly non-instrumental activity. In schools and universities, knowledge is acquired for its own sake. Obviously, this liberal understanding of education differs fundamentally from a ‘critical’ notion of education as advocated by Duncan Kennedy and other members of the CLS movement. From a ‘critical’ perspective, Oakeshott’s conception may be seen as yet another attempt – typical for liberalism and conservatism alike – to depoliticize the process of knowledge production and reproduction and to conceal (and thereby to strengthen and legitimize) its effects on the distribution of power, wealth, status and so forth in society. In this paper, the author will confront both views with each other, especially within the context of legal education. The general purpose is to develop a notion of skeptical legal education, which is to a large extent based on Oakeshott’s understanding of liberal learning but which relativizes its insistence on the non-instrumentality of learning and reinforces its critical potential.


Bart van Klink
Bart van Klink is professor of Legal Methodology at VU University Amsterdam and head of the Department of Legal Theory and Legal History at VU University Amsterdam.
Toont 1 - 20 van 26 gevonden teksten
« 1
U kunt door de volledige tekst zoeken naar alle artikelen door uw zoekterm in het zoekveld in te vullen. Als u op de knop 'Zoek' heeft geklikt komt u op de zoekresultatenpagina met filters, die u helpen om snel bij het door u gezochte artikel te komen. Er zijn op dit moment twee filters: rubriek en jaar.