A second exception can be found in the work of researchers who have used the resources of ethnomethodology and symbolic interactionism in the study of legal frameworks. [75] This type of research is clearly sociological research rather than social law research, as it is constantly discussed with other theoretical traditions of sociology. Max Travers` doctoral dissertation on the work of a criminal law firm accused other sociologists, especially Marxists, of not addressing or respecting how lawyers and clients understand their own actions (a standard argument used by ethnomethodologists in debates with the discipline`s structural traditions). However, he also explored the question raised by legal thinkers in their critique of structural traditions in the sociology of law: to what extent the social sciences can deal with the content of legal practice. In recent years, a very wide spectrum of theories has emerged in the sociology of law due to the spread of theories in sociology. Recent influences include the work of French philosopher Michel Foucault, German social theorist Jürgen Habermas, feminism, postmodernism and deconstruction, neo-Marxism, and behaviorism. The diversity of theoretical influences in the sociology of law has also shaped the broader field of law and society. The multidisciplinary field of law and society remains very popular, while the disciplinary field of legal sociology is also “institutionally and professionally better organized than ever.” [41] Notable practitioners of social law studies include Professor Carol Smart, co-director of the Morgan Centre for the Study of Relationships and Personal Life (named after sociologist David Morgan), and Professors Mavis Maclean and John Eekelaar, co-directors of the Oxford Centre for Family Law and Policy (OXFLAP). The one-year Master`s programme provides students with courses in the theory and methods of social law, as well as a major research paper required. The sociology of law was a small but developing branch of British sociology and jurisprudence at the time Campbell and Wiles wrote their survey of legal and social studies in 1976.
Unfortunately, despite its initial promise, it remained a small estate. Very few empirical sociological studies are published each year. Nevertheless, there have been excellent studies representing a variety of sociological traditions as well as important theoretical contributions. The two most popular approaches in the 1960s and 1970s were interactionism and Marxism. This project addresses the critical situation in the UK through a human rights framework. Poverty remains an ill-defined concept, as such, this project will formulate the first and only current human rights-based definition of poverty to address poverty. In this way, new mechanisms can come into play, which in turn contribute to poverty prevention. Critique of legal pluralism often uses the basic assumptions of legal positivism to question the validity of theories of legal pluralism that aim to criticize these (positivist) assumptions. [102] As Roger Cotterrell explains, the pluralistic conception must be understood as part of “the legal sociologist`s efforts to broaden perspectives on law.
The legal specification of a legal sociologist may differ from that which a lawyer presupposes in practice, but it will refer to the latter (in some respects even imply) because (if it is to reflect legal experience) it must take into account the legal perspectives of lawyers. Therefore, it is likely that a pluralistic approach in legal theory will recognize what jurists generally recognize as law, but will consider that law as a species of a larger kind, or treat lawyers` legal conception as the expression of certain perspectives determined by specific objectives. [103] Since the beginning of the sociology of law, legal pluralism has occupied a central place in the theorization of social law. The sociological theories of Eugen Ehrlich and George Gurvitch were the first sociological contributions to legal pluralism. Moreover, for many decades it has been the most consistent subject of social law debates in the sociology of law and legal anthropology. [92] and received more than its share of criticism from proponents of the various schools of legal positivism. [93] Critics often ask, “How does the law differ from other normative systems from a pluralistic point of view? What makes a system of social rules legal? [94] Contrary to the traditional understanding of law (see separate entry on law), sociology of law generally considers and defines law not only as a system of rules, doctrines and decisions that exist independently of the society from which it originates. The rule-based law aspect, while important, provides an insufficient basis for describing, analyzing and understanding the law in its societal context. [80] Thus, the sociology of law considers law as a set of institutional practices that have evolved over time and have evolved in relation to and through interaction with cultural, economic and socio-political structures and institutions. As a modern social system, law strives to acquire and maintain autonomy in order to function independently of other social institutions and systems such as religion, politics and economics.
Nevertheless, it remains historically and functionally linked to these other institutions. One of the objectives of the sociology of law therefore remains to develop empirical methods capable of describing and explaining the interdependence of modern law with other social institutions. [81] Our faculty actively participates in the creation of an academic community of specialists in social law. We do this through our participation and leadership in professional associations as well as through our published projects and work. Law and Society is an American movement founded after World War II on the initiative mainly of sociologists who were personally interested in the study of law. [42] The justification for the Law and Society movement is subtly summarized by Lawrence Friedman in two short sentences: “Law is a massive vital presence in the United States. The main difference between the sociology of law and law and society is, on the one hand, that the latter is neither theoretically nor methodologically limited to sociology, but tries to absorb the results of all the disciplines of the social sciences. [48] “It not only provides a home for sociologists, social anthropologists, and political scientists interested in law, but also seeks to include psychologists and economists who study law.” [49] From another point of view, both the sociology of law and law and society must be considered as multidisciplinary or transdisciplinary undertakings, although the sociology of law has special links with the methods, theories and traditions of sociology. [50] Lawrence M.
Friedman is one of the social law scholars who introduced the idea of legal culture into the sociology of law. For Friedman, legal culture refers to “the public`s knowledge, attitudes, and patterns of behavior toward the legal system.” [112] They can also be “bodies of habits that are organically linked to culture as a whole. [113] Friedman emphasizes the plurality of legal cultures and points out that legal cultures can be explored at different levels of abstraction, for example at the level of the legal system, state, country or community.