The concept of reflexive justice in liquid society

Author/s Jiri Priban
Publishing Year 2016 Issue 2015/3 Language English
Pages 19 P. 15-33 File size 260 KB
DOI 10.3280/SD2015-003002
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

Article preview

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.

Drawing on Bauman’s concept of liquid modernity and society, this paper discusses the topic of increasingly mobile and evasive forms of power and coeval new forms of legal regulation and domination affecting the concept of justice. Law has adapted to social liquidity and accommodated the techniques and operation of deregulation, devolution and disengagement profoundly affecting the concept of justice, its fragmentation and reflexivity. Using Bauman’s sociological concepts and examples of recent European society and integration, this paper argues that the concept of justice in liquid society cannot be constructed as moralist criticisms of law’s estrangement from its social origins or human values and calls for a return to laws’ ‘roots’, as portrayed in various concepts of social norms or community standards and values. The legal system of modern liquid society rather constructs its internal understanding of social conflicts and formalises their modes of resolution through artificial and self-referential operations. A social theory of justice therefore needs to focus on its limits, internal forms of self-regulation, conceptual self-reference and reflexive interference with the social environment.

Keywords: Liquid society - Legal system - Power - Governance - Democracy

  1. Bauman, Zygmunt, 1987. Legislators and Interpreters: On modernity, post-modernity and intellectuals. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
  2. —, 1989. Modernity and Holocaust. Oxford: Blackwell.
  3. —, 1992. Intimations of Postmodernity. London: Routledge.
  4. —, 1993. Postmodern Ethics. Oxford: Blackwell.
  5. —, 2000. Liquid Modernity. Cambridge: Polity.
  6. —, 2001. The Individualized Society. Cambridge: Polity.
  7. —, 2002. Society under Siege. Cambridge: Polity.
  8. —, 2003. Liquid Love: On the Frailty of Human Bonds. Cambridge: Polity.
  9. —, 2004a. Wasted Lives: Modernity and its Outcasts. Cambridge: Polity.
  10. —, 2004b. Europe: An Unfinished Adventure. Cambridge: Polity.
  11. —, 2005. Liquid Life. Cambridge: Polity.
  12. —, 2006. Humanitní vědec v postmoderním světě [A Humanist Scientist in the Postmodern World]. Prague: Vize 97 Publishing.
  13. Derrida, Jacques, 1992. Force of Law: The Mystical Foundation of Authority. In Drucilla Cornell, Michel Rosenfeld & David G. Carlson (eds.), Deconstruction and the Possibility of Justice. London: Routledge.
  14. Ehrlich, Eugen, [1913]1936. Grundlegung der Soziologie des Rechts. English translation. Fundamental Principles of the Sociology of Law. Cambridge (MA): Harvard University Press.
  15. Gadamer, Hans-Georg, [1960]2003. Wahrheit und Methode. English translation. Truth and Method. London: Continuum.
  16. Gellner, Ernest, 1996. Conditions of Liberty: Civil Society and Its Rivals. London: Penguin.
  17. Glaser, Daniel, 1997. Profitable Penalties: How to Cut Both Crime Rates and Costs. Thousand Oaks (CA): Pine Forge Press.
  18. Günther, Gotthard, 1979. Life as Poly-contexturality. In Id., Beiträge zur Grundlegung einer operationsfähigen Dialektik. Hamburg: Meiner, 1979, 283-306.
  19. Hobsbawm, Eric, 1994. The Age of Extremes: The Short Twentieth Century 1914-1991. London: Michael Joseph.
  20. Marcuse, Herbert, 1968. Liberation from the Affluent Society. In David Cooper (ed.), The Dialectics of Liberation. London: Routledge.
  21. Marx, Karl, & Friedrich Engels, [1848]2002. Manifest der Kommunistischen Partei. English translation. The Communist Manifesto. London: Penguin.
  22. Murphy, Timothy W., 1997. The Oldest Social Science? Configurations of Law and Modernity. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
  23. Nonet, Philippe, & Philip Selznick, 2000, Law and Society in Transition: Toward Responsive Law. New Brunswick, NJ: Transactions Publishers.
  24. Polanyi, Karl, 1944. The Great Transformation: The Political and Economic Origins of Our Time. Boston: Beacon Press.
  25. Pomian, Krzysztof, 1992. Europe et ses frontières. In Id., L’Europe retrouvée. Neuchâtel: Éditions de la Baconière.
  26. Přibáň, Jiří, 2007a. Introduction: Theorizing Liquid Modernity and Its Legal Context. In Id. (ed.), Liquid Society and Its Law. Aldershot: Ashgate.
  27. —, 2007b. European Legality and Its Critique: On Bauman’s Concept of an Adventurous Europe. In Id. (ed.), Liquid Society and Its Law. Aldershot: Ashgate.
  28. Sennett, Richard, 1974. The Fall of Public Man. New York: Random House.
  29. Teubner, Gunther, 1998. Legal Irritants: Good Faith in British Law or How Unifying Law Produces New Divergences. Modern Law Review, 6: 111-32.
  30. —,1993. Law as an Autopoietic System. Oxford: Blackwell.
  31. —, 2001. Economics of Gift - Positivity of Justice: The Mutual Paranoia of Jacques Derrida and Niklas Luhmann. Theory, Culture & Society, 18, 1: 29-47.
  32. —, 2009. Self-subversive Justice: Contingency or Transcendence Formula of Law?. Modern Law Review, 72: 1-23.
  33. Tönnies, Ferdinand, [1887]2001. Gemeinschaft und Gesellschaft. English translation. Community and Civil Society. Cambridge (MA): Cambridge University Press.
  34. Unger, Roberto Mangabeira, 1976. Law in Modern Society. New York: Free Press.

Jiri Priban, The concept of reflexive justice in liquid society in "SOCIOLOGIA DEL DIRITTO " 3/2015, pp 15-33, DOI: 10.3280/SD2015-003002