Legal Consciousness Reconsidered

Abstract

Legal consciousness is a vibrant research field attracting growing numbers of scholars worldwide. Yet differing assumptions about aims and methods have generated vigorous debate, typically resulting from a failure to recognize that three different clusters of scholars—identified here as the Identity, Hegemony, and Mobilization schools—are pursuing different goals and deploying the concept of legal consciousness in different ways. Scholarship associated with these three schools demonstrates that legal consciousness is actually a flexible paradigm with multiple applications rather than a monolithic approach. Furthermore, a new generation of scholars has energized the field in recent years, focusing on marginalized peoples and non-Western settings. Through their findings, and as a result of broader trends across the social sciences, relational legal consciousness has taken on greater importance. Legal consciousness research should be imagined on a continuum ranging from individualistic conceptualizations of thought and action to interactive, co-constitutive approaches.

Justice, Emotion, and Belonging: Legal Consciousness in a Taiwanese Family Conflict

“…To reach a better understanding of how the meaning of legality is constituted through everyday practices, or rather the “cultural production” of hegemonic law (Silbey : 355–357), Silbey stresses the need to focus on the “middle level between citizen and the transcendent rule of law”; this space is embodied by social institutions such as the family unit, schools, corporations, or churches where the formation of cultural meaning, social hierarchy, and ultimately legal consciousness can be empirically observed (Miller ). However, although scholars agree that the focus should be on this middle level, not as much weight is placed on legal hegemony (Chua and Engel ; Liu ). When addressing the issue of law as a form of knowledge that serves as justification for what goes on in social transactions (Silbey and Sarat ), they rather suggest that more attention be put on the mutually constituted effect of law and identity that is connected to an individual's sense of self (Abrego , ; Chua and Engel ; Engel and Munger ; Hartog ; Tungnirun ), or how other norms, customary practices, or social positions influence the way individuals decide to mobilize their rights (Abrego ; Albiston ; Boittin ; Gallagher ; Marshall ).…”

“…This emphasis on the role of identity in legal consciousness is magnified by Chua and Engel's () reasoning that an identity is inherently required for the law to be perceived and therefore plays a distinct role in determining how relevant the law is to an individual when faced with a conflict. Case studies carried out in North America (Engel and Munger ) and Thailand (Engel and Engel ) found that the formation of identity shapes legal consciousness, and vice versa, in a process that is not fixed but transformed throughout the course of one's life.…”

“…In Taiwan, consciousness is subject to the concept of zìjǐrén (自己人, “one of us” or insiders), a culturally embedded emotional complex of belonging that refers to a psychological classification schema of one's level of relational inclusivity or exclusivity within a given group (Gabrenya and Hwang ; Gao et al ; Goodwin and Tang ; Yang ). To be zìjǐrén is a ubiquitous life goal in which great efforts are made to be identified by others as a person who deserves respect and acceptance, which are ambitions found in many other cultures that place a high value on affiliation (Cohen ) or interpersonal relationships (Chua and Engel ).…”

“…Under what circumstances might we view the law as relevant in such situations, and when might we invoke it? To answer these questions, scholars have increasingly turned to the concept of legal consciousness, a research paradigm focusing on the degree to which the concepts and reasoning of law in everyday interactions are understood, related to, interpreted, or implemented within an individual or collective consciousness (Chua and Engel ; Ewick and Silbey ; Engel and Munger ; McCann ). However, it is often the case that individuals find themselves in unstable and confusing conflict situations, where the law is not always cognitively present and may or may not be invoked (Engel 2005; Engel and Engel ; Liu ).…”

Tiesiskā apziņa un tiesiskais nihilisms

“…• identitātes skolu (Identity school) -izvirza hipotēzi, ka tiesiskā apziņa un identitāte rodas un veidojas viena no otras; • hegemonijas skolu (Hegemony school) -uzskata likumu par spēcīgu valsts kontroles instrumentu, kas veido indivīdu pasaules uzskatu, uztveri un lēmumus, turklāt pat tad, ja likums netiek piemērots tieši vai instrumentāli; • mobilizācijas skolu (Mobilisation school) -kontekstualizē tiesisko apziņu, lai izprastu likuma potenciālu pārveidot sabiedrību, īpaši taisnīguma panākšanas nolūkā [7]. Visos minētajos virzienos tiesiskā apziņa konceptuāli tiek saistīta ar elementiem, kas rodas sociālajā mijiedarbībā, respektīvi, -ar uzskatiem, uztveri un rīcību tiesību sfērā.…”