Thinking law: thinking law in motion
This essay argues that one way to “think law” is to think “law in motion”. I will argue that a “law in motion” perspective embodies four core elements or ‘multiplicities’ which are: (1) multiple methodologies; (2) multiple perspectives; (3) multiple vocalities; and (4) multiple media including objec...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Revista de Estudos Empíricos em Direito 2014-07, Vol.1 (2) |
---|---|
1. Verfasser: | |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | |
---|---|
container_issue | 2 |
container_start_page | |
container_title | Revista de Estudos Empíricos em Direito |
container_volume | 1 |
creator | Nielsen, Laura Beth |
description | This essay argues that one way to “think law” is to think “law in motion”. I will argue that a “law in motion” perspective embodies four core elements or ‘multiplicities’ which are: (1) multiple methodologies; (2) multiple perspectives; (3) multiple vocalities; and (4) multiple media including objects. As will become evident by the number of inspiring colleagues that have articulated rationales and perspectives for each of these multiplicities, these are not original ideas for which I can claim credit. And yet, the attempt to put them together in a comprehensive schema with consideration for all four of the multiplicities in the same project, demonstrates that a law in motion perspective can bear new fruit. To do this, my article combines analysis of some of the research in Law & Society that exemplifies these trends and my own research on employment civil rights litigation to interrogate the necessity of a “multiple” approach for our “multiple futures.” |
doi_str_mv | 10.19092/reed.v1i2.41 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>crossref</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_crossref_primary_10_19092_reed_v1i2_41</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>10_19092_reed_v1i2_41</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c771-b4b00c15a97f8d713d4f3f2b13ae67f9553e0e0c73e20e07663baeec509460e73</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpNjzFPwzAQRi0EElXp2D0Da8Kdz4ljNlQBRarEkt1ynHMxtAmyKxD_HgoMnd73LU96QiwRKjRg5E1iHqoPjLJSeCZmktCU0KI-P9mXYpHzKwCgphapnYnr7iWOb3HcFjv3eVscTl4Rx2I_HeI0XomL4HaZF_-ci-7hvluty83z49PqblN6rbHsVQ_gsXZGh3bQSIMKFGSP5LjRwdQ1MTB4TSx_qJuGesfsazCqAdY0F-Wf1qcp58TBvqe4d-nLItjfSHuMtMdIq5C-AeZ2RKs</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype></control><display><type>article</type><title>Thinking law: thinking law in motion</title><source>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</source><source>HeinOnline Law Journal Library</source><creator>Nielsen, Laura Beth</creator><creatorcontrib>Nielsen, Laura Beth</creatorcontrib><description>This essay argues that one way to “think law” is to think “law in motion”. I will argue that a “law in motion” perspective embodies four core elements or ‘multiplicities’ which are: (1) multiple methodologies; (2) multiple perspectives; (3) multiple vocalities; and (4) multiple media including objects. As will become evident by the number of inspiring colleagues that have articulated rationales and perspectives for each of these multiplicities, these are not original ideas for which I can claim credit. And yet, the attempt to put them together in a comprehensive schema with consideration for all four of the multiplicities in the same project, demonstrates that a law in motion perspective can bear new fruit. To do this, my article combines analysis of some of the research in Law & Society that exemplifies these trends and my own research on employment civil rights litigation to interrogate the necessity of a “multiple” approach for our “multiple futures.”</description><identifier>ISSN: 2319-0817</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2319-0817</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.19092/reed.v1i2.41</identifier><language>eng</language><ispartof>Revista de Estudos Empíricos em Direito, 2014-07, Vol.1 (2)</ispartof><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,860,27903,27904</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Nielsen, Laura Beth</creatorcontrib><title>Thinking law: thinking law in motion</title><title>Revista de Estudos Empíricos em Direito</title><description>This essay argues that one way to “think law” is to think “law in motion”. I will argue that a “law in motion” perspective embodies four core elements or ‘multiplicities’ which are: (1) multiple methodologies; (2) multiple perspectives; (3) multiple vocalities; and (4) multiple media including objects. As will become evident by the number of inspiring colleagues that have articulated rationales and perspectives for each of these multiplicities, these are not original ideas for which I can claim credit. And yet, the attempt to put them together in a comprehensive schema with consideration for all four of the multiplicities in the same project, demonstrates that a law in motion perspective can bear new fruit. To do this, my article combines analysis of some of the research in Law & Society that exemplifies these trends and my own research on employment civil rights litigation to interrogate the necessity of a “multiple” approach for our “multiple futures.”</description><issn>2319-0817</issn><issn>2319-0817</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2014</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNpNjzFPwzAQRi0EElXp2D0Da8Kdz4ljNlQBRarEkt1ynHMxtAmyKxD_HgoMnd73LU96QiwRKjRg5E1iHqoPjLJSeCZmktCU0KI-P9mXYpHzKwCgphapnYnr7iWOb3HcFjv3eVscTl4Rx2I_HeI0XomL4HaZF_-ci-7hvluty83z49PqblN6rbHsVQ_gsXZGh3bQSIMKFGSP5LjRwdQ1MTB4TSx_qJuGesfsazCqAdY0F-Wf1qcp58TBvqe4d-nLItjfSHuMtMdIq5C-AeZ2RKs</recordid><startdate>20140731</startdate><enddate>20140731</enddate><creator>Nielsen, Laura Beth</creator><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20140731</creationdate><title>Thinking law: thinking law in motion</title><author>Nielsen, Laura Beth</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c771-b4b00c15a97f8d713d4f3f2b13ae67f9553e0e0c73e20e07663baeec509460e73</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2014</creationdate><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Nielsen, Laura Beth</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><jtitle>Revista de Estudos Empíricos em Direito</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Nielsen, Laura Beth</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Thinking law: thinking law in motion</atitle><jtitle>Revista de Estudos Empíricos em Direito</jtitle><date>2014-07-31</date><risdate>2014</risdate><volume>1</volume><issue>2</issue><issn>2319-0817</issn><eissn>2319-0817</eissn><abstract>This essay argues that one way to “think law” is to think “law in motion”. I will argue that a “law in motion” perspective embodies four core elements or ‘multiplicities’ which are: (1) multiple methodologies; (2) multiple perspectives; (3) multiple vocalities; and (4) multiple media including objects. As will become evident by the number of inspiring colleagues that have articulated rationales and perspectives for each of these multiplicities, these are not original ideas for which I can claim credit. And yet, the attempt to put them together in a comprehensive schema with consideration for all four of the multiplicities in the same project, demonstrates that a law in motion perspective can bear new fruit. To do this, my article combines analysis of some of the research in Law & Society that exemplifies these trends and my own research on employment civil rights litigation to interrogate the necessity of a “multiple” approach for our “multiple futures.”</abstract><doi>10.19092/reed.v1i2.41</doi><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 2319-0817 |
ispartof | Revista de Estudos Empíricos em Direito, 2014-07, Vol.1 (2) |
issn | 2319-0817 2319-0817 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_crossref_primary_10_19092_reed_v1i2_41 |
source | DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals; HeinOnline Law Journal Library |
title | Thinking law: thinking law in motion |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-21T14%3A34%3A12IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-crossref&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Thinking%20law:%20thinking%20law%20in%20motion&rft.jtitle=Revista%20de%20Estudos%20Emp%C3%ADricos%20em%20Direito&rft.au=Nielsen,%20Laura%20Beth&rft.date=2014-07-31&rft.volume=1&rft.issue=2&rft.issn=2319-0817&rft.eissn=2319-0817&rft_id=info:doi/10.19092/reed.v1i2.41&rft_dat=%3Ccrossref%3E10_19092_reed_v1i2_41%3C/crossref%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |