Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorSAHM, Philipp
dc.date.accessioned2013-03-26T11:07:59Z
dc.date.available2013-03-26T11:07:59Z
dc.date.issued2012
dc.identifier.citationFlorence : European University Institute, 2012en
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1814/26439
dc.descriptionAward date: 26 November 2012en
dc.descriptionSupervisor: Professor Dennis Patterson, European University Institute.
dc.description.abstractParadox mentionings have become fashionable in scholarly literature, but are essentially incomplete. Consequently, the question arises whether paradoxophilia is law’s disease or a mere obsession of some legal scholars. A comparison between paradoxes and legal decision-making situations reveals that law in fact suffers from paradoxophilia. The problem posed by legal decision-making situations is structurally identical to the problem posed by paradoxes. A diagnosis of paradoxophilia and the insight into the structure of the disease determines the therapy. Legal methodologies are supposed to guide the decision-making process. However, in order to do so, they must offer something that could be called paradoxicality management. This in turn deepens the understanding of methodological doctrines and opens up a perspective under which legal methodologies can be assessed.en
dc.language.isoenen
dc.relation.ispartofseriesEUI LLM thesesen
dc.relation.ispartofseriesDepartment of Lawen
dc.subject.lcshLaw -- Methodology
dc.subject.lcshParadox
dc.subject.lcshLaw -- Interpretation and construction
dc.titleParadoxophilia: Imaginary invalid or chronic disease? An analysis of paradoxicality in legal decisionsen
dc.typeThesisen


Files in this item

FilesSizeFormatView

There are no files associated with this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record