1.

Record Nr.

UNINA9910300491703321

Autore

Roth-Isigkeit David

Titolo

The Plurality Trilemma : A Geometry of Global Legal Thought / / by David Roth-Isigkeit

Pubbl/distr/stampa

Cham : , : Springer International Publishing : , : Imprint : Palgrave Macmillan, , 2018

ISBN

3-319-72856-3

Edizione

[1st ed. 2018.]

Descrizione fisica

1 online resource (287 pages) : illustrations

Collana

Philosophy, Public Policy, and Transnational Law

Disciplina

341.01

Soggetti

Political science

Law - Philosophy

Law - History

Political science - Philosophy

Political Theory

Theories of Law, Philosophy of Law, Legal History

Political Philosophy

Lingua di pubblicazione

Inglese

Formato

Materiale a stampa

Livello bibliografico

Monografia

Nota di bibliografia

Includes bibliographical references at the end of each chapters and index.

Nota di contenuto

1. Introduction: Theory, Practice, and Meta-Theory -- 2. Global Legal Thought and Plurality -- 3. Taming Plurality through Formal-Legal Rationality: Habermasian Approaches to Global Law -- 4. Unleashing Conflict: Post-Modern Luhmannian Approaches to Global Law -- 5. Process and Harmonizing Principles: Dworkinian Approaches to Global Law -- 6. The Plurality Trilemma – The Contingent Geometry of Global Legal Thought -- 7. Conclusion: Icarus.

Sommario/riassunto

This book provides a comprehensive introduction to global legal thought. It argues that economic globalization and digitalization have induced significant insecurity about the future of human social organization. While traditional international law as a system based on the consent of national states is in the process of rapid adaptation to its new social preconditions, a variety of transnational regulatory levels compete for legal authority. In this process of change, there is more need than ever to guide the theoretical understanding because



academic concepts have a crucial influence on the emerging practice of global law. This book highlights which choices are available and argues that global law requires taking a stand in mutually irreconcilable choices.