Tulkintateorian saaristossa

Show full item record

Permalink

http://urn.fi/URN:ISBN:978-951-51-4814-8
Title: Tulkintateorian saaristossa
Author: Kolehmainen, Esa
Contributor: University of Helsinki, Faculty of Law
Doctoral Programme in Law
Publisher: Helsingin yliopisto
Date: 2019-01-24
URI: http://urn.fi/URN:ISBN:978-951-51-4814-8
http://hdl.handle.net/10138/299494
Thesis level: Doctoral dissertation (monograph)
Abstract: Every useful view to legal system is, at some extent, a perspective, which combines both hermeneutical and normative aspects of human mind. Indeed, in hermeneutics we do not just suffer lack of normative aspects in thinking while our “conceptual framework” is trained to identify and analyze conceptualized facts and phenomenas of the visual world. The problem is also, as it were, how to grasp a linguistic perspective to formation of value-judgments and normative speech in general. Last mentioned items are presupposed in hermeneutics. However, hermeneutical view and the question of language by which to gain position from which we would be able to use language as a tool also outside the scope of positive philosophy of science, are closely linked to each other. Normative aspect takes its steps towards the same problem – the problem of adequate language scheme – but from the different direction. Now we start, as it were in the kelsenian point of view, from the myth of norm and unsatisfactories are semantical by their very nature. We also would like to know how our antirealism works as a pragmatic craftmanship – used in hypothetical situations and guarded by our conceptual potentiality as a whole. Actuality of legal language is always a combination of these two perspectives. The language of legal system should be analogous to hermeneutical point of view to language in general. The semantical steps taken outside the scope of myth are to be adequate to needs of language-user who wishes – for example – to give commands, reason from juristic premises – or justify by means of language, that is: give the best possible argumentable solution to a given legal question. Thesis at hand is a feasibility study on larger investigation on “theory of elementary language” which could give us a better view on conceptuality especially on ethical issues concerning inner point of view and the use of language outside the immediate main field of the philosophy of ordinary language. Thesis interprets subject matter on two meanings. Firstly, how legal theory presupposes internal point of view (and how dworkinian “insider´s view” which I don´t consider distant general concept in comparison to hartian “internal point of view”) when we are dealing with different kinds of abstract problems in theory of law (chapters 2–4). Secondly, how far we can reach without mentioned point of view when making attempts to solve problems – or at least develop solutions to problems – emerging from particular normative cases or from the theory of law itself. Chapters 2–4 introduce the proper items of the work. If, at the same time, we understand them as arguments for the field of study of the internal language, our angle to legal theory is somewhat late wittgensteinian. Chapters are introducing perspectives to the problem of internal language needed both in naturalistic and noncognitive subjectivism. Chapter two deals with relativeness of the sources of law stating 24 different modes of sources. Chapter three interprets the conception of “institutional fact” from the idea of an implication (“ontic implies deontic”) which also have intimate connection to analogy. Chapter 4 interprets the problem of easy cases, that is, cases we consider intuitively and heuristically clear ones from the basis of our sources of law. Thesis claims that we have at least eight built-in ways on our reach to construe doubt in asking normative questions as a necessary conceptual condition for normative thinking.Tulkintateorian saaristossa on esitutkimus oikeustieteen sisäistä näkökulmaa koskevalle tutkimushankkeelle. Kielifilosofiaan orientoituneessa oikeusteoriassa viimeksi mainittu voidaan käsittää ongelmaksi sisäisestä kielestä eli alkeiskielestä, jonka varassa käytämme kieltä – yhtäältä erillään puheesta ja kirjoituksesta, toisaalta luonnollisen kielen yhteyteen hakeutuen. Kyse on myös tulkintatieteelle keskeisen nonkognitivismin ydinalueen tarkastelusta. Aiheen yhteydessä käydään jatkuvaa kamppailua tieteenfilosofisilta periaatteiltaan vahvempia ajattelutapoja, kuten objektiivista relativismia ja kognitivismia, vastaan. Teoksessa lähestytään alkeiskielen ongelmaa kolmen teoria-aiheen – oikeuslähdeopin relatiivisuuden, instituution käsitteen ja helpon tapauksen ongelman – keinoin. Yhdessä aiheet muodostavat ”perspektiiviseksi perheyhtäläisyydeksi” nimitetyn tähystyspaikan, josta käsin varsinaista teorianmuodostuksen työsarkaa voi arvioida. Yksittäisten aiheiden sisäpuolella teoksessa käsitellään muun muassa ensimmäisen ja toisen asteen relatiivisuuden avulla ymmärrettävää oikeuslähteen käsitettä, instituutiota hermeneuttisena edelleen kehitelmänä sekä tapoja järjestää helpon tapauksen ongelma siten, että tiedonintressimme sitä koskien on yhä tulkintatieteen tarkoittama normatiivinen tiedonintressi.
Subject: Oikeustiede
Rights: This publication is copyrighted. You may download, display and print it for Your own personal use. Commercial use is prohibited.


Files in this item

Total number of downloads: Loading...

Files Size Format View
TULKINTA.pdf 2.553Mb PDF View/Open

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show full item record