Phronetic legal inquiry An effective design for law and society research?

Brendon Murphy, Jeffrey McGee

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

4 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Legal research has traditionally involved a technique commonly known as doctrinal method. This practice evolved over centuries of judicial and legal practice. It is directed at the identification, interpretation and application of relevant legal rules to practical human experience, and is broadly characterised by an exhaustive literature review and close reading of case law and legislation. As a practice, doctrinal method has largely not been expressly articulated by those who employ it. Consequently, legal research is often viewed as something lawyers do, rather than explain. Over time, legal scholars have expanded their research designs to incorporate methods and theories drawn from outside law - especially the social sciences - to augment doctrinal work. However, when lawyers engage in such ‘socio-legal research’ they are often criticised for failing to properly articulate the doctrinal component of their research design. We argue that Flyvbjerg’s ‘phronetic social inquiry’ can offer a useful conceptual link between doctrinal method and social science methodology. Phronetic social inquiry involves a case-based, in-depth analytic applied to specific problems, which is sensitive to value choices and power relationships, and directed to finding pragmatic solutions. We argue Phronetic social inquiry has important parallels with legal scholarship and offers a useful way of conceptualising links between doctrinal and qualitative social research. In this way, legal research may be articulated as a phronetic, transdisciplinary process directed at pragmatic problem solving.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)288-313
Number of pages26
JournalGriffith Law Review
Volume24
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - May 2015
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Law
lawyer
research planning
pragmatics
social science
legal usage
transdisciplinary
case law
social research
legislation
interpretation
Society
methodology
Values
experience
time
literature

Cite this

@article{df08ccab7d47468b9d3291c60277fb55,
title = "Phronetic legal inquiry An effective design for law and society research?",
abstract = "Legal research has traditionally involved a technique commonly known as doctrinal method. This practice evolved over centuries of judicial and legal practice. It is directed at the identification, interpretation and application of relevant legal rules to practical human experience, and is broadly characterised by an exhaustive literature review and close reading of case law and legislation. As a practice, doctrinal method has largely not been expressly articulated by those who employ it. Consequently, legal research is often viewed as something lawyers do, rather than explain. Over time, legal scholars have expanded their research designs to incorporate methods and theories drawn from outside law - especially the social sciences - to augment doctrinal work. However, when lawyers engage in such ‘socio-legal research’ they are often criticised for failing to properly articulate the doctrinal component of their research design. We argue that Flyvbjerg’s ‘phronetic social inquiry’ can offer a useful conceptual link between doctrinal method and social science methodology. Phronetic social inquiry involves a case-based, in-depth analytic applied to specific problems, which is sensitive to value choices and power relationships, and directed to finding pragmatic solutions. We argue Phronetic social inquiry has important parallels with legal scholarship and offers a useful way of conceptualising links between doctrinal and qualitative social research. In this way, legal research may be articulated as a phronetic, transdisciplinary process directed at pragmatic problem solving.",
author = "Brendon Murphy and Jeffrey McGee",
year = "2015",
month = "5",
doi = "10.1080/10383441.2015.1041631",
language = "English",
volume = "24",
pages = "288--313",
journal = "Griffith Law Review",
issn = "1038-3441",
publisher = "Taylor and Francis Ltd.",
number = "2",

}

Phronetic legal inquiry An effective design for law and society research? / Murphy, Brendon; McGee, Jeffrey.

In: Griffith Law Review, Vol. 24, No. 2, 05.2015, p. 288-313.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Phronetic legal inquiry An effective design for law and society research?

AU - Murphy, Brendon

AU - McGee, Jeffrey

PY - 2015/5

Y1 - 2015/5

N2 - Legal research has traditionally involved a technique commonly known as doctrinal method. This practice evolved over centuries of judicial and legal practice. It is directed at the identification, interpretation and application of relevant legal rules to practical human experience, and is broadly characterised by an exhaustive literature review and close reading of case law and legislation. As a practice, doctrinal method has largely not been expressly articulated by those who employ it. Consequently, legal research is often viewed as something lawyers do, rather than explain. Over time, legal scholars have expanded their research designs to incorporate methods and theories drawn from outside law - especially the social sciences - to augment doctrinal work. However, when lawyers engage in such ‘socio-legal research’ they are often criticised for failing to properly articulate the doctrinal component of their research design. We argue that Flyvbjerg’s ‘phronetic social inquiry’ can offer a useful conceptual link between doctrinal method and social science methodology. Phronetic social inquiry involves a case-based, in-depth analytic applied to specific problems, which is sensitive to value choices and power relationships, and directed to finding pragmatic solutions. We argue Phronetic social inquiry has important parallels with legal scholarship and offers a useful way of conceptualising links between doctrinal and qualitative social research. In this way, legal research may be articulated as a phronetic, transdisciplinary process directed at pragmatic problem solving.

AB - Legal research has traditionally involved a technique commonly known as doctrinal method. This practice evolved over centuries of judicial and legal practice. It is directed at the identification, interpretation and application of relevant legal rules to practical human experience, and is broadly characterised by an exhaustive literature review and close reading of case law and legislation. As a practice, doctrinal method has largely not been expressly articulated by those who employ it. Consequently, legal research is often viewed as something lawyers do, rather than explain. Over time, legal scholars have expanded their research designs to incorporate methods and theories drawn from outside law - especially the social sciences - to augment doctrinal work. However, when lawyers engage in such ‘socio-legal research’ they are often criticised for failing to properly articulate the doctrinal component of their research design. We argue that Flyvbjerg’s ‘phronetic social inquiry’ can offer a useful conceptual link between doctrinal method and social science methodology. Phronetic social inquiry involves a case-based, in-depth analytic applied to specific problems, which is sensitive to value choices and power relationships, and directed to finding pragmatic solutions. We argue Phronetic social inquiry has important parallels with legal scholarship and offers a useful way of conceptualising links between doctrinal and qualitative social research. In this way, legal research may be articulated as a phronetic, transdisciplinary process directed at pragmatic problem solving.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84954231426&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1080/10383441.2015.1041631

DO - 10.1080/10383441.2015.1041631

M3 - Article

VL - 24

SP - 288

EP - 313

JO - Griffith Law Review

JF - Griffith Law Review

SN - 1038-3441

IS - 2

ER -