Believing, evaluating, knowing: legitimacy and logic in Max Weber’s study of law
This article presents a discussion on therelationship between the development ofsociology, legal sciences, logic, ethics andhistory in relation to human action and itsinterpretation in Max Weber’s neo-Kantiantheory. The methodology adopted is basedon the review of texts by Weber and oth-er relevant...
Guardado en:
| Autor principal: | |
|---|---|
| Formato: | Artículo revista |
| Lenguaje: | Español |
| Publicado: |
Facultad de Derecho y Ciencias Sociales y Políticas, Universidad Nacional del Nordeste
2023
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | https://revistas.unne.edu.ar/index.php/rcd/article/view/6618 |
| Aporte de: |
| Sumario: | This article presents a discussion on therelationship between the development ofsociology, legal sciences, logic, ethics andhistory in relation to human action and itsinterpretation in Max Weber’s neo-Kantiantheory. The methodology adopted is basedon the review of texts by Weber and oth-er relevant authors in political, legal andknowledge theory. Key ideas include are-reading of the formation of the cogni-tive processes that gave rise to the differentforms of the legal order in human history,beyond prescriptive notions that rely on anabsolute and indisputable authority for theformation of the social order (God, “uni-versal laws”, the “absolute spirit”). Amongthese interpretations is that of Weber, whoattributes prominence to the charismatichero as a figure in human history that gen-erates social cohesion. It is contextualizedthat, although there is a similar logic be-tween this idea and that of National Social-ism, he cannot be accused of the emergenceand positioning of a project towards whichhe expressed political and personal discrep-ancies. On the contrary, it invites to analyzethe pre-categorical structure in Weber’slogic, its social and historical environmentand how this logic must be questioned in itsbases and inferences in order to reformulatea new worldview on social, individual andjuridical development. In conclusion, thepaper highlights the application of criteriato evaluate the underlying logics of anytheory, including legal theory, by reviewingthe reasoning in each of the fields. It alsosuggests differentiating concepts based onvalue judgments masked under the aspectof universal notions, and invites the con-struction of solid bases, through the anal-ysis of empirical evidence, to refine, thus,the instruments used in the analysis of thecognitive dimension of legal sciences. |
|---|