Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-kw2vx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-14T13:20:07.693Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

How the Law Thinks: Toward a Constructivist Epistemology of Law

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 July 2024

Gunther Teubner
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Twas bryllig, and the slythy toves did gyre and gymble in the wabe: all mimsy were the borogoves; and the mome raths outgrabe.

American law professor commenting on Niklas Luhmann, “The Unity of the Legal System”

European and American scholars of law and society apparently have problems in communicating with each other. To invoke Lewis Carroll's authority on a piece of legal theory indicates how serious the problems are. After all, traced to its true origins, “Jabberwocky,” the famous “Stanza of Anglo-Saxon Poetry” (Carroll, 1855; 1871: 191), means “weeks of woe” in its original German version (Scott alias Chatterton, 1872). And inextricably involved in the interpretation of the poetry is a certain Hermann von Schwindel . . .

Type
Research Article
Information
Law & Society Review , Volume 23 , Issue 5 , 1989 , pp. 727 - 757
Copyright
Copyright © 1989 The Law and Society Association.

Footnotes

For helpful criticism I would like to thank Zenon Bankowski, Klaus Eder, Michael Donnelly, Reiner Grundmann, Christian Joerges, Wolfgang Krohn, Giandomenico Majone, Neil MacCormick, David Nelken, Helga Nowotny, Alessandro Pizzorno, Joyce Reese, Gerhard Roth, Philip Selznick, Sean Smith.

References

ADAMS, Michael (1985) Ökonomische Analyse der Gefährdungs- und Verschuldenshaftung. Heidelberg: Decker and Schenck.Google Scholar
ALBERT, Hans (1986) “Law as an Instrument of Rational Practice,” in Daintith, T.C. and Teubner, G. (eds.), Contract and Organisation: Legal Analysis in the Light of Economic and Social Theory. Berlin: de Gruyter.Google Scholar
ALCHIAN, Armen A., and H., DEMSETZ (1972) “Production, Information Costs and Economic Organization,” 62 American Economic Review 777.Google Scholar
ALEXY, Robert (1978) Theorie der juristischen Argumentation: Die Theorie des rationalen Diskurses als Theorie der juristischen Begründung. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
APEL, Karl-Otto (1973) “Das Apriori der Kommunikationsgemeinschaft und die Grundlagen der Ethik,” in K. O. Apel, Transformation der Philosophic Frankfurt: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
APEL, Karl-Otto (1988) Diskurs und Verantwortung: Das Problem des Übergangs zur postkonventionellen Moral. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
ARBIB, Michael A., and Mary B., HESSE (1986) The Construction of Reality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
AUBERT, Vilhelm (1980) “On the Relationship between Legal and Sociological Concepts,” in Blankenburg, E., Klausa, E. and Rottleuthner, H. (eds.), Alternative Rechtsformen und Altemativen zum Recht. Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag.Google Scholar
AUBERT, Vilhelm (1983) In Search of Law: Sociological Approaches to Law. Oxford: Robertson.Google Scholar
BADURA, Peter, Fritz, RITTNER, and RÜTHERS, Bernd (1977) Mitbestimmungsgesetz 1976 und Grundgesetz: Gemeinschaftsgutachten. München: Beck.Google Scholar
BARNES, Barry (1974) Scientific Knowledge and Sociological Theory. London: Routledge and Kegan.Google Scholar
BARWISE, Jon, and John, ETCHEMENDY (1987) The Liar: An Essay in Truth and Circularity. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
BAUDRILLARD, Jean (1976) L'échange symbolique et la mort. Paris: Gallimard.Google Scholar
BERGER, Peter L., and Thomas, LUCKMANN (1966) The Social Construction of Reality: A Treatise in the Sociology of Knowledge. New York: Doubleday.Google Scholar
BLOOR, David (1976) Knowledge and Social Imagery. London: Routledge and Kegan.Google Scholar
BÖHLER, Dietrich (1985) Rekonstruktive Pragmatik: Von der Bewuβtsein philosophic zur Kommunikationsreflexion: Neubegründung der praktischen Wissenschaften und Philosophic Frankfurt: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
BOURDIEU, Pierre (1986) “La force du droit: Elements pour une sociologie du champ juridique,” Actes de la recherche en sciences sociales 3.Google Scholar
CARROLL, Lewis (1871) Through the Looking Glass and What Alice Found There (cited after the edition of 1960, Bramhall House, New York) London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
CARROLL, Lewis (1855) “Stanza of Anglo-Saxon Poetry,” Misch-Masch.Google Scholar
CLARK, Robert C. (1985) “Agency Costs Versus Fiduciary Duties,” in Pratt, J. W., and Zeckhauser, R. J. (eds.), Principals and Agents: The Structure of Business. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.Google Scholar
COHEN, Felix S. (1935) “Transcendental Nonsense and the Functional Approach,” 35 Columbia Law Review 809.Google Scholar
COLLINS, Harry (1985) Changing Order: Replication and Induction in Scientific Practice. Beverly Hills: Sage.Google Scholar
COTTERRELL, Roger (1984) The Sociology of Law: An Introduction. London: Butterworths.Google Scholar
COTTERRELL, Roger (1986) “Law and Sociology: Notes on the Constitution and Confrontation of Disciplines,” 13 Journal of Law and Society 9.Google Scholar
CROZIER, Michel, and Erhard, FRIEDBERG (1977) L'acteur et le systeme: Les contraintes de l'action collective. Paris: Seuil.Google Scholar
DAN-COHEN, Meir (1986) Rights, Persons, and Organizations: A Legal Theory for Bureaucratic Society. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
DEGGAU, Hans-Georg (1988) “The Communicative Autonomy of the Legal System,” in Teubner, G. (ed.), Autopoietic Law: A New Approach to Law and Society. Berlin: de Gruyter.Google Scholar
DOUGLAS, Mary (1986) How Institutions Think. Syracuse, NY: Syracuse Universitv Press.Google Scholar
DREYFUS, Hubert L., and Paul, RABINOW (1982) Michel Foucault: Beyond Structuralism and Hermeneutics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
EASTERBROOK, Frank (1988) “Corporations as Contracts.” Conference paper, presented at Stanford Law School, 1988.Google Scholar
ELSTER, Jon (ed.) (1986) The Multiple Self. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
ELSTER, Jon (1985) Making Sense of Marx. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
ELSTER, Jon (1983) Explaining Technical Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
ETZIONI, Amitai (1988) The Moral Dimension: Toward a New Economics. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
FAMA, Eugen F., and JENSEN, Michael (1983) “Agency, Problems and Residual Claims,” 26 Journal of Law and Economics 327.Google Scholar
FEBBRAJO, Alberto (1985) “The Rules of the Game in the Welfare State,” in Teubner, G. (ed.), Dilemmas of Law in the Welfare State. Berlin: de Gruyter.Google Scholar
FODOR, J. A. (1980) “Methodological Solipsism Considered as a Research Strategy in Cognitive Psychology,” 3 Behavioral Brain Science 63.Google Scholar
FÖRSTER, Heinz von (1985) “Entdecken oder Erfinden? Wie Läβt sich Verstehen Verstehen?” in Mohlar, A. (ed.) Einführung in den Konstruktivismus. München: Oldenbourg.Google Scholar
FÖRSTER, Heinz von (1981) Observing Systems. Seaside, CA: Intersystems Publications.Google Scholar
FOUCAULT, Michel (1979) Discipline and Punish. New York: Vintage/Random House.Google Scholar
FOUCAULT, Michel (1974) The Order of Things: An Archaeology of the Human Sciences. London: Tavistock.Google Scholar
FOUCAULT, Michel (1972) The Archaeology of Knowledge. New York: Harper Colophon.Google Scholar
FRANKENBERG, Günter (1987) “Der Ernst im Recht,” 20 Kritische Justiz 281–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
FREY, Reiner (1989) Vom Subjekt zur Selbstreferenz: Rechtstheoretische Überlegungen zur Rekonstruktion der Rechtskategorie. Berlin: Duncker and Humblot.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
FULLER, Steve (1988) Social Epistemology. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
GIDDENS, Anthony (1987) Social Theory and Modern Sociology. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
GILBERT, Nigel, and Michael, MULKAY (1984) Opening Pandora's Box. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
GLASERSFELD, Ernst von (1985) “Konstruktion der Wirklichkeit und des Begriffs der Objektivität,” in Gumin, H. and Mohlar, A. (eds.), Einführung in den Konstruktivismus. München: Oldenbourg.Google Scholar
GLASERSFELD, Ernst von (1981) “An Epistemology for Cognitive Systems,” in Roth, G. and Schwegler, H. (eds.), Self-Organizing Systems: An Interdisciplinary Approach. Frankfurt: Campus.Google Scholar
GLASERSFELD, Ernst von (1975) “Radical Constructivism and Piaget's Concept of Knowledge,” in Murray, F. B. (ed.), Input of Piagetian Theory. Baltimore: University Park Press.Google Scholar
GORDON, Robert W. (1984) “Critical Legal Histories,” 36 Stanford Law Review 57.Google Scholar
GRÜNBERGER, Hans (1987) “Dehumanisierung der Gesellschaft und Verabschiedung staatlicher Souveräniätt: Das Politische System in der Gesellschaftstheorie Niklas Luhmanns” in Fetscher, I. and Münkler, H. (eds.) Pipers Handbuch der politischen Ideen. München: Piper.Google Scholar
GRZEGORCZYK, Christophe (1989) “Système juridique et réalite: Discussion de la théorie autopoiétique du droit,” 33 Archives de philosophic du droit.Google Scholar
GÜNTHER, Klaus (1988) Der Sinn für Angemessenheit: Anwendungsdiskurse in Moral und Recht. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
HABERMAS, Jürgen (1988) Nachmetaphysisches Denken: Philosophische Aufsätze. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
HABERMAS, Jürgen (1987a) The Theory of Communicative Action. The Theory of Communicative Action: A Critique of Functionalist Reason. Vol.2. Boston: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
HABERMAS, Jürgen (1987b) “Wie ist Legitimation durch Legalität möglich?” 20 Kritische Justiz 1.Google Scholar
HABERMAS, Jürgen (1985) “Law as Medium and Law as Institution,” in Teubner, G. (ed.), Dilemmas of Law in the Welfare State. Berlin: de Gruyter.Google Scholar
HABERMAS, Jürgen (1984) The Theory of Communicative Action. Vol. The Theory of Communicative Action. Vol: Reason and the Rationalization of Society. Boston: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
HABERMAS, Jürgen (1983) Moralbewuβtsein und kommunikatives Handeln. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
HABERMAS, Jürgen (1975) Legitimation Crisis. Boston: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
HABERMAS, Jürgen (1974) Communication and the Evolution of Society. Boston: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
HABERMAS, Jürgen (1973) “Wahrheitstheorien,” in Fahrenbach, H. (ed.), Wirlichkeit und Reflexion. Pfullingen: Neske.Google Scholar
HABERMAS, Jürgen (1971a) Knowledge and Human Interest. Boston: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
HABERMAS, Jürgen (1971b) “Vorbereitende Bemerkungen zu einer Theorie der kommunikativen Kompetenz,” in J. Habermas and N. Luhmann, Theorie der Gesellschaft oder Sozialtechnologie—Was leistet die Systemforschung. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
HAYEK, Friedrich A. (1973) Law, Legislation, and Liberty, Vol. Law, Legislation, and Liberty, Vol: Rules and Order. London: Routledge and Paul.Google Scholar
HAYEK, Friedrich A. (1948) Individualism and Economic Order. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
HELLER, Thomas (1988) “Accounting for Law,” in Teubner, G. (ed.), Autopoietic Law: A New Approach to Law and Society. Berlin: de Gruyter.Google Scholar
HELLER, Thomas (1984) “Structuralism and Critique,” 36 Stanford Law Review 127.Google Scholar
HOMANS, George C. (1961) Social Behavior: Its Elementary Forms. London: Routledge and Kegan.Google Scholar
HONNETH, Axel (1985) Kritik der Macht: Reflexionsstufen einer kritischen Gesellschaftstheorie. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
HORWITZ, Morton (1985) “Santa Clara Revisited,” 88 West Virginia Law Review 173.Google Scholar
HUTTER, Michael (1989) Die Produktion von Recht. Tübingen: Mohr und Siebeck.Google Scholar
JHERING, Rudolf von (1884) Scherz und Ernst in der Jurisprudenz. Leipzig: Breitkopf und Haertel.Google Scholar
JOERGES, Christian (1989) “Politische Rechtstheorie and Critical Legal Studies,” in Joerges, C. and Trubek, D. (eds.), Critical Legal Thought: An American-German Debate. Baden-Baden: Nomos.Google Scholar
KENNEDY, David (1985) “Critical Theory, Structuralism, and Contemporary Scholarship,” 21 New England Law Review 209.Google Scholar
KENNEDY, Duncan (1986) “Freedom and Constraint in Adjudication: A Critical Phenomenology,” 36 Journal of Legal Education 518.Google Scholar
KERCHOVE, KERCHOVE Michel van, and François, OST (1988) Le système juridique entre ordre et desordre. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.Google Scholar
KITSCHELT, Herbert (1984) Der kologische Diskurs: Eine Analyse von Gesellschaftskonzeptionen in der Energiedebatte. Frankfurt: Campus.Google Scholar
KNORR-CETINA, Karin (1984) Die Fabrikation von Erkenntnis: Zur Anthropologic der Naturwissenschaft. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
KNYPHAUSEN, Dodo zu (1988) Unternehmungen als evolutionsfähige Systeme: Überlegungen zu einem evolutionären Konzept für die Organisationstheorie. Herrsching: Kirsch.Google Scholar
KRIPPENDORFF, Klaus (1984) “Paradox and Information,” in Dervin, B. and Voight, M. (eds.), Progress in Communication. Norwood: Ablex.Google Scholar
KÜBLER, Friedrich, Walter, SCHMIDT, and Spiros, SIMITIS (1978) Mitbestimmung als gesetzgebungspolitische Aufgabe. Baden-Baden: Nomos.Google Scholar
LADEUR, Karl-Heinz (1989a) “The Law of Uncertainty,” in Joerges, C. and Trubek, D. (eds.), Critical Legal Thought: An American-German Debate. Baden-Baden: Nomos.Google Scholar
LADEUR, Karl-Heinz (1989b) “Zu einer Grundrechtstheorie der Selbstorganisation des Unternehmens,” in Festschrift für Helmut Ridder. Neuwied: Luchterhand.Google Scholar
LADEUR, Karl-Heinz (1988) “Perspectives on a Post-Modern Theory of Law,” in Teubner, G. (ed.), Autopoietic Law: A New Approach to Law and Society. Berlin: de Gruyter.Google Scholar
LADEUR, Karl-Heinz (1984) “Abwägung”—Ein neues Paradigma des Verwaltungsrechts: Von der Einheit der Rechtsordnung zum Rechtspluralismus. Frankfurt: Campus.Google Scholar
LATOUR, Bruno and Steve, WOOLGAR (1979) Laboratory Life: The Construction of Scientific Facts. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
LÜBBE-WOLFF, Gertrude (1981) Rechtsfolgen und Realfolgen. Freiburg: Alber.Google Scholar
LUHMANN, Niklas (1990) “The Coding of the Legal System,” in Febbrajo, A. and Teubner, G. (eds.) State, Law, Economy as Autopoietic Systems. Milano: Giuffrè.Google Scholar
LUHMANN, Niklas (1988a) “Closure and Openness: On Reality in the World of law,” in Teubner, G. (ed.), Autopoietic Law: A New Approach to Law and Society. Berlin: de Gruyter.Google Scholar
LUHMANN, Niklas (1988b) “The Third Question: The Creative Use of Paradoxes in Law and Legal History,” 15 Journal of Law and Society 153.Google Scholar
LUHMANN, Niklas (1988c) Wissenschaft. Bielefeld: Typosript.Google Scholar
LUHMANN, Niklas (1986a) “The Autopoiesis of Social Systems,” in Geyer, F. and van der Zouwen, J. (eds.) Sociocybemetic Paradoxes. London: Sage.Google Scholar
LUHMANN, Niklas (1986b) “The Individuality of the Individual: Historical Meaning and Contemporary Problems,” in Heller, T. C., Sosna, M., and Wellbery, D. E. (eds.), Reconstructing Individualism: Autonomy, Individuality, and the Self in Western Thought. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
LUHMANN, Niklas (1986c) “Intersubjektivität oder Kommunikation: Unterschiedliche Ausgangspunkte soziologischer Theoriebildung,” 54 Archivio di Filosofia 41.Google Scholar
LUHMANN, Niklas (1986d) “The Theory of Social Systems and Its Epistemology: Reply to Danilo Zolo's Critical Comments,” 16 Philosophy of the Social Sciences 129–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
LUHMANN, Niklas (1985) “Die Autopoiese des Bewuβtseins,” 36 Sociale Welt 402.Google Scholar
LUHMANN, Niklas (1984) Soziale Systemme: Grundriβ einer allgemeinen Theorie. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
LUHMANN, Niklas (1983) “Individuum und Gesellschaft,” 39 Universitas 1.Google Scholar
LUHMANN, Niklas (1974) Rechtssystem und Rechtsdogmatik. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer.Google Scholar
MAJONE, Giandomenico (1989) Evidence, Argument and Persuasion in the Policy Process. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
MAJONE, Giandomenico (1979) “Process and Outcome in Regulatory Decision-Making,” in Weiss, C. H. and Barton, A. (eds.), Making Bureaucracies Work. Beverly Hills: Sage.Google Scholar
MATURANA, Huberto R., and Francisco J., VARELA (1980) Autopoiesis and Cognition. Boston: Reidel.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MAYNTZ, Renate (1986) “Steuerung, Steuerungsakteure und Steuerungsinstrumente: Zur Prazisierung des Problems,” 70 HiMon-DB. Siegen: Universität.Google Scholar
MENGONI, Luigi (1988) “La questione del 'diritto giusto' nella societa postliberale,” 11 Fenomenologia e Societa Diritto ed Etica Pubblica 14.Google Scholar
NELSON, Alan (1984) “Some Issues Surrounding the Reduction of Macroeconomics to Microeconomics,” 51 Philosophy of Science 573.Google Scholar
NERHOT, Patrick (1988) “The Fact of Law,” in Teubner, G. (ed.), Autopoietic Law: A New Approach to Law and Society. Berlin: de Gruyter.Google Scholar
OPP, Karl-Dieter (1973) Soziologie im Recht. Reinbek: Rowohlt.Google Scholar
OST, François (1988) “Between Order and Disorder: The Game of Law,” in Teubner, G. (ed.), Autopoietic Law: A New Approach to Law and Society. Berlin: de Gruyter.Google Scholar
PIAGET, Jean (1971) The Construction of Reality in the Child. New York: Ballantine.Google Scholar
PIZZORNO, Alessandro (1989) “Spiegazione come re-identificatione,” in Sciolla, L., and Ricolfi, L. (eds.), Il soggetto dell'azione: Paradigmi sociologichi e immagini dell'attore sociale. Milano: Angeli.Google Scholar
PODAK, Klaus (1984) “Ohne Subjekt, ohne Vernunft: Bei der Lektüre von Niklas Luhmanns Hauptwerk ‘Soziale Systeme’,” 7 Merkur 733.Google Scholar
Karl, POPPER (1953) The Poverty of Historicism. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
PREUSS, Ulrich K. (1989) “Rationality Potentials of Law: Allocative, Distributive and Communicative Rationality,” in Joerges, C. and Trubek, D. (eds.), Critical Legal Thought: An American-German Debate. Baden-Baden: Nomos.Google Scholar
PRINS, H. (1980) Offenders, Deviants or Patients? An Introduction to the Study of Socio-Forensic Problems. London: Tavistok.Google Scholar
QUINE, Willard V. (1976) The Ways of Paradox. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
ROOS, Carl Martin (1988) “Corporate Personality and Contractual Structure: Legal Aspects on the Firm as a Nexus of Treaties,” Uppsala: Manuscript.Google Scholar
ROTH, Gerhard (1987) “Die Entwicklung kognitiver Selbstreferentialität im menschlichen Gehirn,” in Baecker, D. et al. (eds.), Theorie als Passion. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
ROTH, Gerhard (1984) “Erkenntnis und Realität: Das Gehirn und seine Wirklichkeit,” in Pasternack, G. (ed.), Erklären, Verstehen, Begründen. Bremen: Universität.Google Scholar
ROTTLEUTHNER, Hubert (1988) “Biological Metaphors in Legal Thought,” in Teubner, G. (ed.), Autopoietic Law: A New Approach to Law and Society. Berlin: de Gruyter.Google Scholar
ROTTLEUTHNER, Hubert (1980) “Diskussionsvotum zum vorstehenden Beitrag,” in Blankenburg, E., Klausa, E., and Rottleuthner, H. (eds.), Alternative Rechtsformen und Alternativen zum Recht. Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag.Google Scholar
ROTTLEUTHNER, Hubert (1979) “Zur Methode einer folgenorientierten Rechtsanwendung,” Archiv für Rechts- und Sozialphilosophie, Beiheft 13. Wiesbaden: Steiner.Google Scholar
SCHANE, Sanford A. (1987) “The Corporation is a Person: The Language of a Legal Fiction,” 61 Tulane Law Review 563.Google Scholar
SCHANZE, Erich (1987) “Contract, Agency, and the Delegation of Decision Making,” in Bamberg, G. and Spreman, K. (eds.), Agency Theory, Information, and Incentives. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
SCHANZE, Erich (1986) “Potential and Limits of Economic Analysis: The Constitution of the Firm,” in Daintith, T. and Teubner, G. (eds.), Contract and Organisation: Legal Analysis in the Light of Economic and Social Theory. Berlin: de Gruyter.Google Scholar
SCHIMANK, Uwe (1985) “Der mangelnde Akteurbezug systemtheoretischer Erklärungen gesellschaftlicher Differenzierung—Ein Diskussionsvorschlag,” 14 Zeitschrift für Soziologie 421.Google Scholar
SCHMIDT, Siegfried (ed.) (1987) Der Diskurs des Radikalen Konstruktivismus. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
SCOTT, Robert (1872) “The Jabberwock Traced to Its True Source,” Macmillan's Magazine, February.Google Scholar
SELZNICK, Philip (1968) “Law: The Sociology of Law,” 9 International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences 50.Google Scholar
SKINNER, Quentin (1985) The Return of Grand Theory in the Human Sciences. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
TEUBNER, Gunther (1990) “Social Order from Legislative Noise? Autopoietic Closure as a Problem for Legal Regulation,” in Teubner, G. and Febbrajo, A. (eds.), State, Law, Economy as Autopoietic Systems. Milano: Giuffrè.Google Scholar
TEUBNER, Gunther (1989) “And God Laughed . . .: Indeterminacy, Self-Reference, and Paradox in Law,” in Joerges, C. and Trubek, D. (eds.), Critical Legal Thought: An American-German Debate. Baden-Baden: Nomos.Google Scholar
TEUBNER, Gunther (1988a) “Enterprise Corporatism: New Industrial Policy and the ‘Essence’ of the Legal Person,” 36 American Journal of Comparative Law 130.Google Scholar
TEUBNER, Gunther (1988b) “Evolution of Autopoietic Law,” in Teubner, G. (ed.), Autopoietic Law: A New Approach to Law and Society. Berlin: de Gruyter.Google Scholar
TEUBNER, Gunther (1988c) “Hypercycle in Law and Organization: The Relationship between Self-Observation, Self-Constitution and Autopoiesis,” European Yearbook in the Sociology of Law 43.Google Scholar
TEUBNER, Gunther (1982) “Generalklauseln als sozio-normative Modelle,” in Stachowiak, H. (ed.), Bedürfnisse, Werte und Normen im Wandel. Bd. 1. München: Fink and Schöningh.Google Scholar
VARDARO, Gaetano (1990) “Before and Beyond the Legal Personality: Group Enterprises and Industrial Relations,” in Sugarman, D. and Teubner, G. (eds.), Regulating Corporate Groups in Europe. Baden-Baden: Nomos.Google Scholar
VARELA, Francisco J. (1984) “Living Ways of Sense-Making: A Middle Path for Neuro-Science,” in Livingstone, P. (ed.), Disorder and Order: Proceedings of the Stanford International Symposium. Saratoga, CA: Anma Libri.Google Scholar
WEBER, Max (1978) Economy and Society. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
WEINBERG, Alvin M. (1972) “Science and Trans-science,” 10 Minerva 209.Google Scholar
WEINTRAUB, E. Roy (1979) Microfoundations: The Compatibility of Microeconomics and Macroeconomics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
WIETHÖLTER, Rudolf (1989) “Proceduralization of the Category of Law” in Joerges, C. and Trubek, D. (eds.), Critical Legal Thought: An American-German Debate. Baden-Baden: Nomos.Google Scholar
WIETHÖLTER, Rudolf (1986) “Social Science Models in Economic Law,” in Daintith, T. and Teubner, G. (eds.), Contract and Organisation: Legal Analysis in the Light of Economic and Social Theory. Berlin: de Gruyter.Google Scholar
WIETHÖLTER, Rudolf (1985) “Materialization and Proceduralization in Modern Law,” in Teubner, G. (ed.) Dilemmas of Law in the Welfare State. Berlin: de Gruyter.Google Scholar
WILLIAMSON, Oliver E. (1987) “The Contractual Logic of Internal Organization.” Firenze: EUI Conference paper.Google Scholar
WINDSCHEID, Bernhard (1904) “Die Aufgaben der Rechtswissenshaft,” in B. Windscheid, Gesammelte Reden und Abhandlungen. Leipzig: Duncker.Google Scholar
WINTER, Gert (1987) “Die Angst des Richters bei der Technikbewertung,” 20 Zeitschrift für Rechtspolitik 425.Google Scholar
WOLF, Rainer (1986) Der Stand der Technik. Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
WORMELL, C. P. (1958) “On the Paradoxes of Self-Reference,” 67 Mind 267.Google Scholar