Law is manifestly a plurality of pluralities
“Law is manifestly a plurality of pluralities”
Fuzziness is often contested as disingenuous and meaningless in various postmodern topics, but this is not at all the case in legal field; though addressing the limitations of current law theories is prerequisite, the pluralist approach to law attempts to diagnose conflicts between the overlapping pluralities of social and legal fields; to recognise it’s fuzziness, in order to find practical solutions to deal with such fuzzy situations, as Melissaris (2004: 76 in Menski 2006: 5) stated:
The study of the legal must be directed towards the discovery of alternative perceptions of the world and justice and of different practices of solving practical problems by accommodating competing interests as well as meeting the prerequisites of substantive justice. The question of law and justice then becomes one concerning our whole way of life, how we perceive and place ourselves in our surroundings.
Menski addresses the essential need for awareness of pluralising effects from globalisation, or ‘glocalisation’ (Robertson 1995), and that legal scholars should search for pluralistic definition for law, and to acquire a holistic view on law and justice in a global sense, in order to see the real bigger picture. As Menski (2006: 5) describes:
Global migration patterns, old and new, and multiple exchanges between different states, economies, societies and legal systems, on a variety of scales and through different methods, have over time created transnational, inherently plural, multi-ethnic and multicultural legal environments, which are becoming ever more prominent in reality today.
The paradigm shift of globalisation continuously increases the interconnectedness of individuals; the effects of globalisation is a conspicuous fact. Yet, it’s critical relevancy to legal field has not yet sufficiently recognised by legal scholars due to the domination of eurocentric positivism for more than two hundred years. While in
Fuzziness is often contested as disingenuous and meaningless in various postmodern topics, but this is not at all the case in legal field; though addressing the limitations of current law theories is prerequisite, the pluralist approach to law attempts to diagnose conflicts between the overlapping pluralities of social and legal fields; to recognise it’s fuzziness, in order to find practical solutions to deal with such fuzzy situations, as Melissaris (2004: 76 in Menski 2006: 5) stated:
The study of the legal must be directed towards the discovery of alternative perceptions of the world and justice and of different practices of solving practical problems by accommodating competing interests as well as meeting the prerequisites of substantive justice. The question of law and justice then becomes one concerning our whole way of life, how we perceive and place ourselves in our surroundings.
Menski addresses the essential need for awareness of pluralising effects from globalisation, or ‘glocalisation’ (Robertson 1995), and that legal scholars should search for pluralistic definition for law, and to acquire a holistic view on law and justice in a global sense, in order to see the real bigger picture. As Menski (2006: 5) describes:
Global migration patterns, old and new, and multiple exchanges between different states, economies, societies and legal systems, on a variety of scales and through different methods, have over time created transnational, inherently plural, multi-ethnic and multicultural legal environments, which are becoming ever more prominent in reality today.
The paradigm shift of globalisation continuously increases the interconnectedness of individuals; the effects of globalisation is a conspicuous fact. Yet, it’s critical relevancy to legal field has not yet sufficiently recognised by legal scholars due to the domination of eurocentric positivism for more than two hundred years. While in
References: Freeman, M. D. A. 2008. Lloyd’s introduction to jurisprudence. 8th edn. London: Sweet & Maxwell. Menski, Werner. 2003. Hindu law. Beyond tradition and modernity. New Delhi: Oxford University Press. Menski, Werner. 2006. Comparative law in a global context. The legal systems of Asia and Africa. Second edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Menski, Werner. 2010a. ‘Sanskrit law: Excavating Vedic legal pluralism’. SOAS School of Law Legal Studies Research Paper Series. Menski, Werner. 2010b. ‘Fuzzy law and the boundaries of secularism’. Religare Seminar 24 June 2010.