| http://dbpedia.org/ontology/abstract
|
Per giusformalismo (o formalismo giuridico … Per giusformalismo (o formalismo giuridico o positivismo giuridico) s'intende la corrente di pensiero filosofico-giuridica idealistica che studia la forma (che è carattere costante del fenomeno giuridico) piuttosto che il contenuto (che è carattere variabile del fenomeno giuridico) del diritto. L'espressione giusformalismo è controversa perché la tendenza formalistica, essendo propria del pensiero filosofico generale, solo in tempi recenti ha trovato una prima delimitazione teorica. Ciò comporta che la tendenza formalistica riflessa nel pensiero giuridico manca, non solo della lunga tradizione delle correnti giusnaturalistiche, ma di una definizione precisa. Parimenti, l'espressione formalismo giuridico, ancorché sia la più diffusa, evidenzia fenomeni vari e non coordinati fra loro. Raramente si rinviene un autore che si riferisca alla sua teoria qualificandola come formale. È più comune, al contrario, ritrovare una tale qualificazione nei detrattori di queste teorie. Per esempio, Hans Kelsen è stato tacciato di formalismo, ma, invero, egli scrisse solo un articolo riguardo a tale questione e preferì definire la sua teoria pura anziché formale.finire la sua teoria pura anziché formale.
, 法律形式主义（Legal Formalism）属于法律实证主义的法理学和法哲学。边沁 … 法律形式主义（Legal Formalism）属于法律实证主义的法理学和法哲学。边沁的实证主义可以被看作针对的是立法机关，而法律形式主义则针对的是法官，即法律形式主义并不像实证主义那样认为法律的实质公正是无关的，而是认为，在民主社会中，那是一个立法者——而非法官——需要解决的问题。 法律形式主义认为，法官和其他公共官员对法律文本的解释应当限于其直白的意思，如果法官有权造法，而非局限于释法，那就将违反三权分立。在法律形式主义看来，法律是一系列独立于其他政治和社会制度的规则和原则。 法律形式主义和实证主义密切相关。实证主义把注意力集中在法律产生之后，而对法律如何制定、立法者向何处努力都并不关注。如果实证主义可以说是在解释“法律是什么”，那么形式主义就可以说是从实证的角度来解释法和法律体系如何运作。 与法律形式主义之相对的是法律工具主义，即一种和美国法律现实主义相关的理论。工具主义认为，为了实现好的公共政策和社会利益，可以在对法律的文本解释中进行创新，尽管法律工具论也会认为法律的目的是推动公正或保障人权。法律工具主义反对法官有权出于其对好政策的个人看法而改变法律，认为那样将破坏法治。权。法律工具主义反对法官有权出于其对好政策的个人看法而改变法律，认为那样将破坏法治。
, Legal formalism is both a descriptive theo … Legal formalism is both a descriptive theory and a normative theory of how judges should decide cases. In its descriptive sense, formalists maintain that judges reach their decisions by applying uncontroversial principles to the facts; formalists believe that there is an underlying logic to the many legal principles that may underlie different cases. These principles, they claim, are straightforward and can be readily discovered by anyone with some legal expertise. The ultimate goal of that kind of formalism would be to describe the underlying principles in a single and determinate system that could be applied mechanically—from which the term "mechanical jurisprudence" comes. The antithesis of formalism is legal realism, which has been said to be "[p]erhaps the most pervasive and accepted theory of how judges arrive at legal decisions." This descriptive conception of "legal formalism" can be extended to a normative theory, which holds that judges should decide cases by the application of uncontroversial principles to the facts; "sound legaldecisions can be justified as the conclusions of valid deductive syllogisms."onclusions of valid deductive syllogisms."
, Юриди́чний формалі́зм — юридичний позитиві … Юриди́чний формалі́зм — юридичний позитивістський напрям у Філософії права та Юриспруденції. Тоді як юридичний позитивізм Джерема Бентема legal positivism може розглядатися як пов'язаний з діяльністю законодавчого органу, юридичний формалізм має відношення до діяльності судді; тобто, на відміну від позитивізму, формалізм припускає, що субстантивна справедливість права є іррелевантною, але швидше, в умовах демократії, це питання, яке слід адресувати законодавцю, а не судді.е слід адресувати законодавцю, а не судді.
|
| http://dbpedia.org/ontology/wikiPageExternalLink
|
https://web.archive.org/web/20051215234516/http:/www.warwick.ac.uk/~sysdt/stlalw2004-06.htm +
|
| http://dbpedia.org/ontology/wikiPageID
|
299920
|
| http://dbpedia.org/ontology/wikiPageLength
|
11548
|
| http://dbpedia.org/ontology/wikiPageRevisionID
|
1093720529
|
| http://dbpedia.org/ontology/wikiPageWikiLink
|
http://dbpedia.org/resource/Massachusetts_Constitution +
, http://dbpedia.org/resource/Critical_legal_studies +
, http://dbpedia.org/resource/Trier_of_fact +
, http://dbpedia.org/resource/Case_law +
, http://dbpedia.org/resource/Category:Formalism_%28philosophy%29 +
, http://dbpedia.org/resource/Civil_law_%28legal_system%29 +
, http://dbpedia.org/resource/Human_rights +
, http://dbpedia.org/resource/Metacognition +
, http://dbpedia.org/resource/Jurisprudence +
, http://dbpedia.org/resource/Legal_positivism +
, http://dbpedia.org/resource/Rule_according_to_higher_law +
, http://dbpedia.org/resource/Deontic_logic +
, http://dbpedia.org/resource/Plain_meaning_rule +
, http://dbpedia.org/resource/Category:Theories_of_law +
, http://dbpedia.org/resource/Textualism +
, http://dbpedia.org/resource/Codification_%28law%29 +
, http://dbpedia.org/resource/Reasonable_doubt +
, http://dbpedia.org/resource/Antonin_Scalia +
, http://dbpedia.org/resource/Supreme_Court_of_the_United_States +
, http://dbpedia.org/resource/Legal_realism +
, http://dbpedia.org/resource/Originalism +
, http://dbpedia.org/resource/Christopher_Columbus_Langdell +
, http://dbpedia.org/resource/Judicial_activism +
, http://dbpedia.org/resource/Judiciary +
, http://dbpedia.org/resource/Instrumentalism +
, http://dbpedia.org/resource/Executive_%28government%29 +
, http://dbpedia.org/resource/Precedent +
, http://dbpedia.org/resource/Separation_of_powers +
, http://dbpedia.org/resource/Imperative_logic +
, http://dbpedia.org/resource/Justice +
, http://dbpedia.org/resource/Jan_Wole%C5%84ski +
, http://dbpedia.org/resource/Georg_Henrik_von_Wright +
, http://dbpedia.org/resource/Law +
, http://dbpedia.org/resource/Normative +
, http://dbpedia.org/resource/Frederick_Schauer +
, http://dbpedia.org/resource/Legislature +
, http://dbpedia.org/resource/Legal_case +
, http://dbpedia.org/resource/Common_law +
, http://dbpedia.org/resource/Category:Sociology_of_law +
, http://dbpedia.org/resource/United_States_Constitution +
, http://dbpedia.org/resource/Judge +
|
| http://dbpedia.org/property/wikiPageUsesTemplate
|
http://dbpedia.org/resource/Template:Citation_needed +
, http://dbpedia.org/resource/Template:Reflist +
, http://dbpedia.org/resource/Template:Technical +
, http://dbpedia.org/resource/Template:Short_description +
, http://dbpedia.org/resource/Template:Law +
|
| http://purl.org/dc/terms/subject
|
http://dbpedia.org/resource/Category:Formalism_%28philosophy%29 +
, http://dbpedia.org/resource/Category:Sociology_of_law +
, http://dbpedia.org/resource/Category:Theories_of_law +
|
| http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/hypernym
|
http://dbpedia.org/resource/View +
|
| http://www.w3.org/ns/prov#wasDerivedFrom
|
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_formalism?oldid=1093720529&ns=0 +
|
| http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/isPrimaryTopicOf
|
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_formalism +
|
| owl:sameAs |
http://ru.dbpedia.org/resource/%D0%A4%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%BC%D0%B0%D0%BB%D0%B8%D0%B7%D0%BC_%28%D0%BF%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%B2%D0%BE%29 +
, http://www.wikidata.org/entity/Q1779729 +
, https://global.dbpedia.org/id/j3yy +
, http://uk.dbpedia.org/resource/%D0%AE%D1%80%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B8%D1%87%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%B9_%D1%84%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%BC%D0%B0%D0%BB%D1%96%D0%B7%D0%BC +
, http://it.dbpedia.org/resource/Giusformalismo +
, http://fa.dbpedia.org/resource/%D8%B5%D9%88%D8%B1%D8%AA%E2%80%8C%DA%AF%D8%B1%D8%A7%DB%8C%DB%8C_%D8%AD%D9%82%D9%88%D9%82%DB%8C +
, http://hi.dbpedia.org/resource/%E0%A4%B5%E0%A4%BF%E0%A4%A7%E0%A4%BF%E0%A4%95_%E0%A4%B0%E0%A5%80%E0%A4%A4%E0%A4%BF%E0%A4%B5%E0%A4%BE%E0%A4%A6 +
, http://he.dbpedia.org/resource/%D7%A4%D7%95%D7%A8%D7%9E%D7%9C%D7%99%D7%96%D7%9D_%D7%9E%D7%A9%D7%A4%D7%98%D7%99 +
, http://yago-knowledge.org/resource/Legal_formalism +
, http://bg.dbpedia.org/resource/%D0%9F%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%B2%D0%B5%D0%BD_%D1%84%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%BC%D0%B0%D0%BB%D0%B8%D0%B7%D1%8A%D0%BC +
, http://rdf.freebase.com/ns/m.01rs04 +
, http://tr.dbpedia.org/resource/Hukuki_%C5%9Fekilcilik +
, http://dbpedia.org/resource/Legal_formalism +
, http://zh.dbpedia.org/resource/%E6%B3%95%E5%BE%8B%E5%BD%A2%E5%BC%8F%E4%B8%BB%E4%B9%89 +
|
| rdf:type |
http://dbpedia.org/class/yago/Thinking105770926 +
, http://dbpedia.org/class/yago/HigherCognitiveProcess105770664 +
, http://dbpedia.org/ontology/Company +
, http://dbpedia.org/class/yago/Abstraction100002137 +
, http://dbpedia.org/class/yago/PsychologicalFeature100023100 +
, http://dbpedia.org/class/yago/Explanation105793000 +
, http://dbpedia.org/class/yago/Theory105989479 +
, http://dbpedia.org/class/yago/Process105701363 +
, http://dbpedia.org/class/yago/Cognition100023271 +
, http://dbpedia.org/class/yago/WikicatTheoriesOfLaw +
|
| rdfs:comment |
Per giusformalismo (o formalismo giuridico … Per giusformalismo (o formalismo giuridico o positivismo giuridico) s'intende la corrente di pensiero filosofico-giuridica idealistica che studia la forma (che è carattere costante del fenomeno giuridico) piuttosto che il contenuto (che è carattere variabile del fenomeno giuridico) del diritto.abile del fenomeno giuridico) del diritto.
, Legal formalism is both a descriptive theo … Legal formalism is both a descriptive theory and a normative theory of how judges should decide cases. In its descriptive sense, formalists maintain that judges reach their decisions by applying uncontroversial principles to the facts; formalists believe that there is an underlying logic to the many legal principles that may underlie different cases. These principles, they claim, are straightforward and can be readily discovered by anyone with some legal expertise. The ultimate goal of that kind of formalism would be to describe the underlying principles in a single and determinate system that could be applied mechanically—from which the term "mechanical jurisprudence" comes. The antithesis of formalism is legal realism, which has been said to be "[p]erhaps the most pervasive and accepted [p]erhaps the most pervasive and accepted
, Юриди́чний формалі́зм — юридичний позитиві … Юриди́чний формалі́зм — юридичний позитивістський напрям у Філософії права та Юриспруденції. Тоді як юридичний позитивізм Джерема Бентема legal positivism може розглядатися як пов'язаний з діяльністю законодавчого органу, юридичний формалізм має відношення до діяльності судді; тобто, на відміну від позитивізму, формалізм припускає, що субстантивна справедливість права є іррелевантною, але швидше, в умовах демократії, це питання, яке слід адресувати законодавцю, а не судді.е слід адресувати законодавцю, а не судді.
, 法律形式主义（Legal Formalism）属于法律实证主义的法理学和法哲学。边沁 … 法律形式主义（Legal Formalism）属于法律实证主义的法理学和法哲学。边沁的实证主义可以被看作针对的是立法机关，而法律形式主义则针对的是法官，即法律形式主义并不像实证主义那样认为法律的实质公正是无关的，而是认为，在民主社会中，那是一个立法者——而非法官——需要解决的问题。 法律形式主义认为，法官和其他公共官员对法律文本的解释应当限于其直白的意思，如果法官有权造法，而非局限于释法，那就将违反三权分立。在法律形式主义看来，法律是一系列独立于其他政治和社会制度的规则和原则。 法律形式主义和实证主义密切相关。实证主义把注意力集中在法律产生之后，而对法律如何制定、立法者向何处努力都并不关注。如果实证主义可以说是在解释“法律是什么”，那么形式主义就可以说是从实证的角度来解释法和法律体系如何运作。 与法律形式主义之相对的是法律工具主义，即一种和美国法律现实主义相关的理论。工具主义认为，为了实现好的公共政策和社会利益，可以在对法律的文本解释中进行创新，尽管法律工具论也会认为法律的目的是推动公正或保障人权。法律工具主义反对法官有权出于其对好政策的个人看法而改变法律，认为那样将破坏法治。权。法律工具主义反对法官有权出于其对好政策的个人看法而改变法律，认为那样将破坏法治。
|
| rdfs:label |
Формализм (право)
, 法律形式主义
, Legal formalism
, Юридичний формалізм
, Giusformalismo
|
