“So Lonely”: Comparative Law and the Quest for Interdisciplinary Legal Education

Author:

Resta GiorgioORCID

Abstract

AbstractFor various reasons, that will be recalled and analysed throughout this paper, interdisciplinarity has become the keyword for any debate on legal education reform. However, what is meant by interdisciplinarity and how it should be achieved is open for discussion. Paradigms of “scientificity” of the law vary dramatically among legal cultures. Whereas in the US the advent of a more ‘substantial’ legal thought after the New Deal went hand in hand with the rise of the interdisciplinary paradigm, in Europe the traditional assumption of law’s autonomy has repeatedly been challenged, eroded and adapted, but it still represents the bulwark of the orthodox approach to law and legal scholarship. In the Continent, mainstream legal scholarship does not take as its object the social reality, but only the gamut of rules recognized as binding norms. Coherent with this approach is a model of legal education built around certain axioms, such as the statist and nationalist attitude, the extreme compartmentalization among the various branches of law, and the blindness to its surroundings. Comparative law is one of the few disciplines that provide a different role model for a legal scholar who is apt to confront the challenges of complex societies. Keeping at a reasonable distance the authority paradigm, embodying the spirit of enquiry and cherishing the values of pluralism (both in terms of legal pluralism and cognitive openness), comparativists may give specific content to the paradigm of the jurist as a social engineer. Comparative law may therefore offer an invaluable contribution to the debate on legal education reform.

Funder

Università degli Studi Roma Tre

Publisher

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Reference94 articles.

1. Cassese, Sabino. 2017. Legal education under fire. European Rev. Priv. L 143.

2. Arthur, Dyevre. 2017. Fixing European law schools, 151. Priv. L: European Rev.

3. Dufour, Alfred. 1994. Le paradigme scientifique dans la pensée juridique moderne. In Théorie du droit et science, ed. Paul Amselek, 147. Paris: PUF.

4. Kiesow, Rainer Maria. 1994. Science naturelle et droit dans la deuxième moitié du XIXe siècle en Allemagne. In Théorie du droit et science, ed. Amselek Paul, 187. Paris: PUF.

5. Teubner, Gunther. 2014. Recht und Sozialtheorie: Drei Probleme. Ancilla Iuris 183.

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3