...
首页> 外文期刊>International journal of law and psychiatry >An assessment of the existence and influence of psychoanalytic jurisprudence in the United States
【24h】

An assessment of the existence and influence of psychoanalytic jurisprudence in the United States

机译:对美国精神分析法学的存在和影响的评估

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

In light of the ongoing controversy over the value of psychoanalysis generally, this article summarizes the standards for scientific expertise in law and concludes that the future of psychoanalytic jurisprudence does not lie in the courtroom. After a brief survey of the history of psychoanalytic jurisprudence in legal contexts and institutions, I identify a revival of psychoanalytic jurisprudence, including (i) its association, primarily as a social theory, with Critical Legal Studies (in the US context), and (ii) the influence of Jacques Lacan in the legal academy. The unifying themes in this critical methodology include the construction of the subject through the language and rituals of the law, the failure of mainstream jurisprudence to be sufficiently critical of the legal status quo, and the repression or denial of injustices in legal history. Paralleling that revival, I note that a field of scholarship employing traditional Freudian conceptions is also currently engaging interdisciplinary legal studies, intervening in law reform efforts (particularly in criminal law), and criticizing the background assumptions and conventions in contemporary judicial opinions. I conclude that psychoanalysis is both threatening to mainstream legal culture and a rich source of insights for contemporary studies of legal processes and institutions. (C) 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
机译:鉴于对精神分析的价值普遍存在争议,本文总结了法律专业知识的标准,并得出结论认为,精神分析法学的未来并不在于法庭上。在对法律背景和机构中的精神分析法学的历史进行了简短的调查后,我确定了精神分析法学的复兴,包括(i)它主要是作为一种社会理论与批判法律研究的联系(在美国)。 ii)雅克·拉康在法律学院中的影响力。这种批判性方法论的统一主题包括通过法律的语言和礼节建构主题,主流法学未能充分批评法律现状以及对法律历史中不公正现象的压制或否认。伴随着复兴,我注意到一个采用传统的弗洛伊德思想的学术领域目前也正在从事跨学科的法律研究,干预法律改革的努力(尤其是在刑法方面),并批评当代司法观点中的背景假设和惯例。我得出的结论是,心理分析既威胁着主流法律文化,也威胁着当代法律程序和制度研究的丰富见解。 (C)2016 Elsevier Ltd.保留所有权利。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号