Brian Z. Tamanaha has written extensively on realism in jurisprudence, but in his Realistic Theory of Law (2018), he uses "realism" in a commonplace way to ground a rough outline of legal history. While he refers to his method as genealogical, he does not acknowledge the complex tensions in the development of the philosophical use of that term from Nietzsche to Foucault, and the complex epistemological issues that separate them. While the book makes many interesting points, the methodological concerns outweigh them in the overall assessment of the value of the work
This rejoinder responds to criticisms by Jan Klabbers and Ino Augsburg of the The New Legal Realist ...
This article will address some criticisms of legal realism, primarily those of H.L.A. Hart, that hav...
The possibility of any meaningful relationship between the legal realists and natural law looks at f...
Brian Z. Tamanaha has written extensively on realism in jurisprudence, but in his Realistic Theory o...
Book Review of Brian Tamanaha, A Realistic Theory of Law Brian Z. Tamanaha has written extensively ...
In his informative and provocative Article, Understanding Legal Realism,\u27my colleague-to-be, Bria...
The ultimate question posed by the realistic movement in American jurisprudence is whether the pract...
H.L.A. Hart’s well-known rejection of American Legal Realism turned in part on the idea that Realism...
This paper explores the contribution by the contemporary legal realist Hanoch Dagan. Dagan’s brand o...
What did legal realism bring to the conflict of laws? Why was the realist critique of the received w...
Jurisprudence can be called as the foundation of law that helps in forming, analyzing and interpreti...
American legal realism is commonly treated as a theory-pariah. The article exposes certain reasons e...
In contemporary jurisprudential writing, there is no lack of attention to method. Although I have pa...
From time to time there arises a school of legal thought which undertakesto make a clean sweep of th...
In his provocative new book, A Realistic Theory of Law, Brian Tamanaha offers a variety of insightfu...
This rejoinder responds to criticisms by Jan Klabbers and Ino Augsburg of the The New Legal Realist ...
This article will address some criticisms of legal realism, primarily those of H.L.A. Hart, that hav...
The possibility of any meaningful relationship between the legal realists and natural law looks at f...
Brian Z. Tamanaha has written extensively on realism in jurisprudence, but in his Realistic Theory o...
Book Review of Brian Tamanaha, A Realistic Theory of Law Brian Z. Tamanaha has written extensively ...
In his informative and provocative Article, Understanding Legal Realism,\u27my colleague-to-be, Bria...
The ultimate question posed by the realistic movement in American jurisprudence is whether the pract...
H.L.A. Hart’s well-known rejection of American Legal Realism turned in part on the idea that Realism...
This paper explores the contribution by the contemporary legal realist Hanoch Dagan. Dagan’s brand o...
What did legal realism bring to the conflict of laws? Why was the realist critique of the received w...
Jurisprudence can be called as the foundation of law that helps in forming, analyzing and interpreti...
American legal realism is commonly treated as a theory-pariah. The article exposes certain reasons e...
In contemporary jurisprudential writing, there is no lack of attention to method. Although I have pa...
From time to time there arises a school of legal thought which undertakesto make a clean sweep of th...
In his provocative new book, A Realistic Theory of Law, Brian Tamanaha offers a variety of insightfu...
This rejoinder responds to criticisms by Jan Klabbers and Ino Augsburg of the The New Legal Realist ...
This article will address some criticisms of legal realism, primarily those of H.L.A. Hart, that hav...
The possibility of any meaningful relationship between the legal realists and natural law looks at f...