Research article

Monocentryzm i multicentryzm jako teorie prawne w czasie globalizacji

Autorzy artykułu
  1. Tadeusz Buksiński

Monocentrism and Multicentrism as Legal Theories in the Global Era

Archiwum Filozofii Prawa i Filozofii Społecznej, nr 1(10)/2015, s. 5-13

polski

Abstrakt

The article describes two opposing theories of legislation and jurisprudence in the global age: multicentrism and monocentrism. The first one claims that a new legal system at the supra-state level is emerging, which must take into consideration varied legal traditions. The second one stresses that certain fundamental principles must be shared today by all people. It seems that the ultimate goal of jurisprudence is to create a system of laws that reconciles multitude and diversity with unity.

Słowa kluczowe

  • multicentryzm
  • monocentryzm
  • teoria legislacji

angielski

Abstract

The article describes two opposing theories of legislation and jurisprudence in the global age: multicentrism and monocentrism. The first one claims that a new legal system at the supra-state level is emerging, which must take into consideration varied legal traditions. The second one stresses that certain fundamental principles must be shared today by all people. It seems that the ultimate goal of jurisprudence is to create a system of laws that reconciles multitude and diversity with unity.

Keywords

  • multicentrism
  • monocentrism
  • theory of legislation
Pełny tekst PDF Jak cytować

Bibliografia

14 pozycji bibliograficznych

Literatura

  1. Antoniades, A. (2003). Epistemic Communities, Epistemes and the Construction of (World) Politics. Global Society 17/1, 21–38.

  2. Brugger, W., Neumann, U., Kirste, S. (2008). Rechtsphilosophie im 21 Jahrhundert. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp.

  3. Byers, M. (1999). Custom, Power and the Power of Rules. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  4. Clark, I. (2007). International Legitimacy and World Society. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  5. Dunne, T., Wheeler, N.J. (2001). (Eds.) Human Rights in Global Politics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  6. Hart, H.L.A. (1998). Pojęcie prawa. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.

  7. Koehane, R. (1989). International Institutions and State Power. Essays in International Relations Theory. Boulder: Westview Press.

  8. Koskenniemi, M. (2001). Carl Schmitt, Hans Morgenthau, and the Image of Law in International Relations. In M. Bayers ( Ed.), The Role of Law in International Politics (pp. 17–34). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  9. Łętowska, E. (2005). Multicentryczność współczesnego systemu prawa i jej konsekwencje. Państwo i Prawo 60/4, 6–10.

  10. McCorquodale, R. (2006). The Individual and the International Legal System. In M.D. Evans ( Ed.), International Law (pp. 284–310). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  11. Nye, J. (2004). Soft Power: The Means to Success in World Politics. New York: Public Affairs.

  12. Shelton, D. (2000). (Ed.) Commitment and Compliance: The Role of Non -Binding Norms in the International Legal System. New York: Oxford University Press.

  13. Talbott, W. (2005). Which Rights Should Be Universal? Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  14. Zirk-Sadowski, M., Golecki, M.J., Wojciechowski, B. (2009). (Eds.) Multicentrism as an Emerging Paradigm in Legal Theory. Brno: Peter Lang.

Informacje o publikacji

Autor i afiliacja

Tadeusz Buksiński

Adam Mickiewicz University in Poznań

Dane wydania

Numer nr 1(10)/2015

Strony
5-13
Opublikowano
DostępOpen LicencjaCC BY 4.0 ↗

Jak cytować

Opis bibliograficzny i zweryfikowane formaty eksportowe.

Format AFPiFS

T. Buksiński, Monocentryzm i multicentryzm jako teorie prawne w czasie globalizacji, „Archiwum Filozofii Prawa i Filozofii Społecznej” nr 1(10)/2015, s. 5–13, DOI: 10.36280/afpifs.2015.1.5