Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-p2v8j Total loading time: 0.001 Render date: 2024-05-21T06:03:13.023Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Rationality Potentials of Law - Allocative, Distributive, and Communicative Rationality

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 March 2019

Ulrich K. Preuss

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

It is hardly controversial that the modern law is a pivotal element in the process of societal rationalization. But the concept of rationality (or rationalization) is rather vague and ambiguous; even beginning to clarify it requires elements of a social theory. The law is not a quasi-technical, neutral “instrument” which can be applied in any society for any purpose. Rather, as an element of a society's structure it not only codetermines its specific mode of reproduction but informs us about the standard of civilization a society has attained. Throughout this essay I shall take the position that, for reasons of politics, morality, and what I understand to be ongoing requirements of justification in stable societies, we wish to privilege law in some way. This position is closely connected with the quest for legal rationality.

Type
Articles
Information
German Law Journal , Volume 12 , Issue 1: Critical Legal Thought: An American-German Debate—Republication [with a new Introduction] Twenty-Five Years Later — , 01 January 2011 , pp. 488 - 515
Copyright
Copyright © 2011 by German Law Journal GbR 

References

1 K. Polanyi, C.M. Arensberg, H.W. Pearson, Trade and Market in the Early Empires (1971); K. Polanyi, Primitive, Archaic and Modern Economies. Essays of Karl Polanyi (Dalton, G. ed., 1968); Wesel U., Frühformen des Rechts in vorstaatlichen Gesell-schaften, 52 (1985)Google Scholar

2 P. Nonet & P. Selznick, Law and Society in Transition: Toward Responsive Law (1978); Habermas, J., Theorie des kommunikativen Handelns. Zur Kritik der funktionalistischen Vernunft, 525 (1981); Wiethölter, R., Entwicklung des Rechtsbegriffs, 8 Jahrbuch für Rechtssoziologie und Rechtstheorie 38 (1982); Wiethölter, R., Materialization and Proceduralization, in Modern Law, in Dilemmas of Law in the Welfare State, 221 (Teubner, G. ed., 1986); G. Teubner (ed.), The Dilemmas of Law in the Welfare State, 13 (1986); Teubner, G., The Transformation of Law in the Welfare State, in The Dilemmas of Law in the Welfare State (Teubner, G. ed., 1986); Teubner, G., After Legal Instrumentalism? Strategic Models of Post-regulatory Law, in G. Teubner (ed.), The Dilemmas of Law in the Welfare State (1986)Google Scholar

3 Teubner, id., 1986Google Scholar

4 Hobbes, T., Leviathan, 143 Part II, Ch.17 (1978)Google Scholar

5 Weber, M., Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft, 506 (1964)Google Scholar

6 Horwitz, M.J., The Transformation of American Law 1780-1860, 31 (1977); Preuss, U.K., The Concept of Rights and the Welfare State, in Dilemmas of Law in the Welfare State, 157 (Teubner, G. ed., 1986)Google Scholar

7 Weber, supra, note 5, 648Google Scholar

8 Weber, supra, note 5, 647Google Scholar

9 Preuss, supra, note 6, 158Google Scholar

10 Teubner, supra, note 2, 6 (1986)Google Scholar

11 Habermas, supra, note 2, 537; Habermas, J., Law as Medium and Law as Institution, in Dilemmas of the Welfare State, 212 (Teubner, G. ed., 1986)Google Scholar

12 Habermas, id., 213 (1986)Google Scholar

13 Habermas, supra, note 11, 214 (1986)Google Scholar

14 Habermas, id., 215Google Scholar

15 Bundesverfassungsgericht, 1980 BVerfGE 58, 257/271Google Scholar

16 Habermas, supra, note 11, 218 (1986)Google Scholar

17 Dworkin, R., Taking Rights Seriously, 273 (1978)Google Scholar

18 Sennett, R., The Fall of Public Man, 331 (1977)Google Scholar

19 Teubner, supra, note 2, 317 (1986)Google Scholar

20 Teubner, supra, note 2, 311 (1986)Google Scholar

21 Neumann, F.L., The Change in the Function of Law in Modern Society, in The Democratic and The Authoritarian State, 22 (1957); Neumann, F.L., Die Herrschaft des Gesetzes, 245 (1980)Google Scholar

22 Alemann, U. v., R.G. Heinze, Verbände und Staat. Vom Pluralismus zum Korporatismus (1981)Google Scholar

23 Teubner, supra, note 2, 301, 308 (1986); Teubner, G., Hyperzyklus in Recht und Organisation: Zum Verhältnis von Selbstbeobachtung, Selbstkonstitution und Autopoiese, 8 (1986)Google Scholar

24 Teubner, supra, note 2, 309 (1986); Teubner, , supra, note 23, 31 (1986)Google Scholar

25 Teubner, supra, note 23, 35 (1986)Google Scholar

26 Teubner, supra, note 2, 310 (1986)Google Scholar

27 Teubner, G., Autopoiese im Recht: Zum Verhältnis von Evolution und Steuerung im Rechtssystem, 42, 43 (1986); Teubner, , supra, note 23, 40, 41 (1986)Google Scholar

28 Teubner, supra, note 27, 48 (1986)Google Scholar

29 Wiethölter, supra, note 2; for constitutional law in Germany: P. Häberle, Grundrechte im Leistungsstaat, 30 Veröffentlichungen der Vereinigung der Deutschen Staatsrechtslehrer 43 (1972); Hesse, K., Bestand und Bedeutung der Grundrechte in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland, 5 Europäische Grundrechte Zeitschrift 427 (1978); Grimm, D., Verfahrensfehler als Grundrechtsverstöße, 4 Neue Zeitschrift für Verwaltungsrecht 865 (1985); for the U.S.: J.H. Choper, Judicial Review and the National Political Process (1980); Ely, J.H., Democracy and Distrust. a Theory of Judicial Review (1980); Parker, R.D., The Past of Constitutional Theory - And Its Future, 42 Ohio State Law Journal 223 (1981).Google Scholar

30 Teubner, supra, note 23, 9 (1986)Google Scholar

31 Teubner, supra, note 23, 12 (1986)Google Scholar

32 Hart, H.L.A., The Concept of Law, 91 (10th ed., 1979)Google Scholar

33 Teubner, supra, note 23, 35 (1986)Google Scholar

34 Teubner, supra, note 27, 17 (1986)Google Scholar

35 Hart, supra, note 32, 97Google Scholar

36 Id., 102Google Scholar

37 Id., 99Google Scholar

38 Id., 105, 113Google Scholar

39 Teubner, supra, note 2, 316 (1986)Google Scholar

40 Teubner, supra, note 27, 39 (1986)Google Scholar

41 Wiethölter, supra, note 2, 249 (1986)Google Scholar

42 Teubner, supra, note 27, 36 (1986)Google Scholar

43 Teubner, supra, note 2, 1986Google Scholar

44 Hart, supra, note 32, 113Google Scholar

45 U.K. Preuss, Politische Verantwortung und Bürgerloyalität. Von den Grenzen der Verfassung und des Gehorsams in der Demokratie (1984)Google Scholar

46 Nonet, & Selznick, , supra, note 2, 95Google Scholar

47 Holmes, S., Precommitment and the paradox of democracy, in Constitutionalism and Democracy (I. Elsler, R. Slagstad eds., 1988)Google Scholar

48 Additional References: Ladeur, K.H., “Abwägung” - Ein neues Paradigma des Verwaltungsrechts. Von der Einheit der Rechtsordnung zum Rechtspluralismus (1984); Luhmann, N., Zur Funktion des ‘subjektiven Rechts', in 1 Jahrbuch für Rechtssoziologie und Rechtstheorie 322 (1970); Luhmann, N., Rechtssoziologie. Reinbek (1972); Preuss, U.K., Die Internalisierung des Subjekts. Zur Kritik der Funktionsweise des subjektiven Rechts (1979).Google Scholar