Social sciences or cognitive sciences? Insights for a socio-cognitive approach

Journal title SOCIOLOGIA DEL DIRITTO
Author/s Luigi Cominelli
Publishing Year 2022 Issue 2022/1 Language Italian
Pages 16 P. 37-52 File size 215 KB
DOI 10.3280/SD2022-001002
DOI is like a bar code for intellectual property: to have more infomation click here

Below, you can see the article first page .

If you want to buy this article in PDF format, you can do it, following the instructions to buy download credits

Anteprima articolo

FrancoAngeli is member of Publishers International Linking Association, Inc (PILA), a not-for-profit association which run the CrossRef service enabling links to and from online scholarly content.

This paper introduces the special issue on Law, Sociology and Cognitive Science. The under-lying argument is that only if sociology of law goes beyond its epistemological confinement, it will allow formulating plausible predictions and explanations, and it will provide verifiable theories. It was precisely in the work of its pioneers that sociology was conceived of as an interdisciplinary science. We also believe to be scientifically controversial that disciplines be-longing to the realm of social sciences offer visions that are inexplicably incompatible with the natural history of the world, and inconsistent with one another. As the epistemological wall separating the natural sciences from the human sciences is brittler than we used to think, a re-newed cognitive (or socio-cognitive) approach, in both its symbolic and its behavioural paradigms, may help sociologists to reconnect, and make sense of, the multiple levels of under-standing that help explain social life and social normativity (including its "legal rules" subset). Finally, it is necessary to dwell on some of the main epistemological and ethical obstacles that prevent the establishment of an ongoing and permanent dialogue between social sciences and cognitive sciences.

Keywords: Social sciences - Cognitive sciences - Interdisciplinarity - Cognition

  1. Acquaviva, Sabino, 1993. La strategia del gene. Bisogni e sistema sociale. Roma-Bari: Laterza.
  2. Banakar, Reza, & Max Travers, 2005. Introduction. In Reza Banakar & Max Travers (eds.), Theory and Method in Socio-Legal Research. Oxford-Portland, OR: Hart Publishing.
  3. Boudon, Raymond, 1969. Relazioni tra proprietà individuali e proprietà collettive. In Raymond Boudon & Paul F. Lazarsfeld (a cura di), Proprietà individuali e proprietà collettive: un problema di analisi ecologica. Bologna: il Mulino.
  4. Brożek, Bartosz, & Jaap Hage, 2021. Introduction: Between Law and the Cognitive Sciences – A Manifesto. In Brożek Bartosz, Jaap Hage & Nicole Vincent (eds.), Law and Mind: A Survey of Law and the Cognitive Sciences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1-14. DOI: 10.1017/9781108623056.001
  5. Cahill‐O’Callaghan, Rachel, & Linda Mulcahy, 2022. Where Are the Numbers? Challenging the Barriers to Quantitative Socio‐legal Scholarship in the United Kingdom. Journal of Law and Society, August, 1–14.
  6. Chiassoni, Pierluigi, 2021. “The Law and Cognitive Sciences Enterprise: A Few Analytic Notes.” In Brożek Bartosz, Jaap Hage & Nicole Vincent (eds.), Law and Mind: A Survey of Law and the Cognitive Sciences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 490-506. DOI: 10.1017/9781108623056.001
  7. Cipriani, Roberto, 2020. Body and Biology. Academicus International Scientific Journal, 21, 11: 46–52. https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:etc:journl:y: 2021:i:24:p:16-38 (consultato il 12 febbraio 2022).
  8. Cominelli, Luigi, 2018. Cognition of the Law: Toward a Cognitive Sociology of Law and Behavior. Cham: Springer Nature. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-89348-8.
  9. Crippen, Timothy, 1994. Neo-Darwinian Approaches in the Social Sciences: Unwarranted Concerns and Misconceptions. Sociological Perspectives, 37, 3: 391-401. DOI: 10.2307/1389503
  10. Danziger, Shai, Jonathan Levavb & Liora Avnaim-Pessoa, 2011. Extraneous Factors in Judicial Decisions. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA, 108, 17: 6889-6892.
  11. Dosi, Giovanni, Marco Faillo & Luigi Marengo, 2021. Beyond Bounded Rationality”. Behaviours and Learning in Complex Evolving Worlds. In Riccardo Viale (ed.), Routledge Handbook of Bounded Rationality. London-New York: Routledge. DOI: 10.4324/9781315658353.
  12. Edwards, Harry T., 1992. The Growing Disjunction between Legal Education and the Legal Profession. Michigan Law Review, 91, 1: 34-78. DOI: 10.2307/1289788
  13. Elias, Norbert, 2000. The Civilizing Process. Sociogenetic and Psycogenetic Investigations. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
  14. Gallese, Vittorio, Antonio Mastrogiorgio, Enrico Petracca & Riccardo Viale, 2021. Embodied Bounded Rationality. In Riccardo Viale (ed.), Routledge Handbook of Bounded Rationality. London-New York: Routledge. DOI: 10.4324/9781315658353.
  15. Gallino, Luciano, 1982. Proprietà dei sistemi nella riproduzione biologica e culturale. In Marco Ingrosso, Sergio Manghi & Vittorio Parisi (a cura di), Sociobiologia possibile. neodarwinismo e scienze dell’uomo: la ricerca di un’alternativa al determinismo biologico. Milano: FrancoAngeli.
  16. Gallino Luciano, 1987. l’attore sociale. biologia, cultura e intelligenza artificiale. Torino: Scientifica Einaudi.
  17. Gianola, Alberto. 1997. Evoluzione e Diritto. Rivista di diritto civile, 2: 413-429.
  18. Gigerenzer, Gerd, 2015. On the Supposed Evidence for Libertarian Paternalism. Review of Philosophy and Psychology, 6, 3: 361-383.
  19. Gigerenzer Gerd, 2021. “What Is Bounded Rationality?”. In Riccardo Viale (ed.), Routledge Handbook of Bounded Rationality. London-New York: Routledge. DOI: 10.4324/9781315658353.
  20. Grove, William M., & Paul E. Meehl, 1996. Comparative Efficiency of Informal (Subjective, Impressionistic) and Formal (Mechanical, Algorithmic) Prediction Procedures: The Clinical-Statistical Controversy. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 2, 2: 293–323. DOI: 10.1037/1076-8971.2.2.293
  21. Gruter, Margaret, 1992. An Ethological Perspective on Law and Biology. In Roger D. Masters & Margaret Gruter (eds.), The Sense of Justice. Biological Foundations of Law. Newbury Park-London-New Dehli: Sage.
  22. Hage, Jaap, 2021. Are the Cognitive Sciences Relevant for Law? In Brożek Bartosz, Jaap Hage & Nicole Vincent (eds.), Law and Mind: A Survey of Law and the Cognitive Sciences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 17-49. DOI: 10.1017/9781108623056.001
  23. Haye, Andrés, Ricardo Morales & Sebastián Niño, 2017. “The Social/Neuroscience: Bridging or Polarizing Culture and Biology?” In Agustín Ibáñez, Lucas Sedeño & Adolfo M García (eds.), Neuroscience and Social Science: The Missing Link: 217–39. Cham: Springer International Publishing. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-68421-5_10.
  24. Hopcroft, Rosemary L., 2009. The Evolved Actor in Sociology. Sociological Theory 27 (4): 390–406.
  25. Schauer, Frederick, 1993. Free Speech and the Cultural Contingency of Constitutional Categories. Cardozo Law Review, 14: 865-880.
  26. Jones, Owen D., 1999. “Law, Emotions, and Behavioral Biology.” In Lawrence A. Frolik, Wolfgang Fikentscher & Gerti Dieker (eds.), Law & Evolutionary Biology. Portola Valley: Gruter Institute for Law and Behavioral Research.
  27. Jones Owen D., 2001. Time-Shifted Rationality and the Law of Law’s Leverage: Behavioral Economics Meets Behavioral Biology. Northwestern University Law Review, 95, 4: 1141-1206.
  28. Kahneman, Daniel, 2011. Thinking, Fast and Slow. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
  29. Kahneman Daniel,, Olivier Sibony & Cass R. Sunstein, 2021. Noise: A Flaw in Human Judgement. New York: Little, Brown and Company.
  30. Kahneman Daniel, & Amos Tversky, 2000. Choices, Values, and Frames. In Daniel Kahneman & Amos Tversky (eds.), Choices, Values, and Frames. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  31. Masters, Roger D., 1992. Naturalistic Approaches to Justice in Political Philosophy and the Life Sciences. In Roger D. Masters & Margaret Gruter (eds.), The Sense of Justice. Biological Foundations of Law. Newbury Park-London-New Dehli: Sage.
  32. McCubbins, Colin H., Mathew D. McCubbins & Mark Turner, 2021. Building a New Rationality From the New Cognitive Neuroscience. In Riccardo Viale (ed.), Routledge Handbook of Bounded Rationality. London-New York: Routledge. DOI: 10.4324/9781315658353
  33. Meloni, Maurizio, 2019. Impressionable Biologies. From the Archaeology of Plasticity to the Sociology of Epigenetics. New York: Routledge.
  34. Mercier, Hugo, & Dan Sperber, 2021. Bounded Reason in a Social World. In Riccardo Viale (ed.), Routledge Handbook of Bounded Rationality. London-New York: Routledge. DOI: 10.4324/9781315658353
  35. Meyering, Theo C., 2000. Physicalism and Downward Causation in Psychology and the Special Sciences. Inquiry, 43, 2: 181-202. DOI: 10.1080/002017400407744
  36. Morin, Edgar, 1977. La Méthode. 1. La nature de la nature. Paris: Éditions du Seuil.
  37. Pałka, Przemysław, 2021. Private Law and Cognitive Science. In Brożek Bartosz, Jaap Hage & Nicole Vincent (eds.), Law and Mind: A Survey of Law and the Cognitive Sciences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 217-248. DOI: 10.1017/9781108623056.001
  38. Pisati, Maurizio, 2007. Unità della sociologia, unità della scienza. Alcune riflessioni sull’identità disciplinare della sociologia. Sociologica, 1: 1-11. DOI: 10.2383/24197
  39. Pluchino, Alessandro, 2018. La firma della complessità. Catania: Malcor D’ Edizione.
  40. Posner, Richard A., 1987. The Decline of Law as an Autonomous Discipline: 1962-1987. Harvard Law Review, 100: 761.
  41. Reutskaja, Elena, Sheena Iyengar, Barbara Fasolo & Raffaella Misuraca, 2021. Cognitive and Affective Consequences of Information and Choice Overload. In Riccardo Viale (ed.), Routledge Handbook of Bounded Rationality. London-New York: Routledge. DOI: 10.4324/9781315658353
  42. Rose, Nikolas, 2007. The Politics of Life Itself: Biomedicine, Power, and Subjectivity in the Twenty-First Century. Princeton-Oxford: Princeton University Press.
  43. Rossi, Arianna, Rossana Ducato, Helena Haapio, Stefania Passera & Monica Palmirani, 2019. Legal Design Patterns: Towards a New Language for Legal Information Design. In Erich Schweighofer, Franz Kummer & Ahti Saarenpää (eds.). Internet of Things. Proceedings of the 22nd International Legal Informatics Symposium IRIS 2019. Bern: Weblaw.
  44. Runciman, Walter G., 2005. Stone Age Sociology. The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, 11, 1: 129-142. DOI: 10.2307/3803992
  45. Sarti, Simone, 2015. Evoluzione e complessità sociale. introduzione a una teoria del cambiamento sociale. Novara: De Agostini.
  46. Simon, Herbert A., 1957. Models of Man. New York-London: John Wiley - Chapman & Hall.
  47. Squazzoni, Flaminio, 2012. Agent-based Computational Sociology. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons. DOI: 10.1002/978111995420
  48. Stanovich, Keith E., 2021. Why Humans Are Cognitive Misers and What It Means for the Great Rationality Debate. In Riccardo Viale (ed.), Routledge Handbook of Bounded Rationality. London-New York: Routledge. DOI: 10.4324/9781315658353.
  49. Stelmach, Jerzy, 2021. The Cognitive Approach in Legal Science and Practice: A History of Four Revolutions. In Brożek Bartosz, Jaap Hage & Nicole Vincent (eds.), Law and Mind: A Survey of Law and the Cognitive Sciences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 507-520. DOI: 10.1017/9781108623056.001
  50. Thagard, Paul, 2021. How Rationality Is Bounded by the Brain. In Riccardo Viale (ed.), Routledge Handbook of Bounded Rationality. London-New York: Routledge. DOI: 10.4324/9781315658353.
  51. Thaler, Richard H. &Cass R Sunstein, 2009. Nudge. Improving Decisions About Health, Wealth and Happyness. London: Penguin Books.
  52. van den Berghe, Pierre L., 1990. Why Most Sociologists Don’t (And Won’t) Think Evolutionarily, Sociological Forum, 5, 2: 173-185. DOI: 10.2307/684459
  53. Vick, Douglas W., 2004. Interdisciplinarity and the Discipline of Law. Journal of Law and Society, 31, 2.

Luigi Cominelli, Scienze sociali o scienze cognitive? Idee per un approccio socio-cognitivo in "SOCIOLOGIA DEL DIRITTO " 1/2022, pp 37-52, DOI: 10.3280/SD2022-001002