There is something quite puzzling about the global conversation on jurisprudence. On the one hand, jurisprudence is supposed to deal with abstract questions concerning the nature, structure, and distinctive features of the law. These questions are not tightly associated with, or dependent on, the particular legal practices in one jurisdiction or another. But, on the other hand, it seems that jurisprudents are tacitly affected by their background institutional context: there is an evident divide between theorizing about the law in the civil law world and in the common law world.
Jurisprudence in the Mirror: The Common Law World Meets the Civil Law World systematically presents the major achievements of contemporary civil law jurisprudence to the common law world and bridges the gap in analytic jurisprudence as it is currently practiced in the two traditions. The volume seeks to bring different voices to the table and overcome the cultural and linguistic divides that have created barriers in philosophical exchanges. The book's structure is dialogical: it includes twelve essays written by prominent and influential jurisprudents from the civil law world, each followed by a response by a jurisprudent from the common law world. This approach highlights what the two worlds share, where they part ways, and why. The varied contributions reveal how their respective legal traditions shape fundamental legal concepts and jurisprudential debates and will be invaluable to readers from both the civil and common law worlds.
.jpg?1680780797)
