In conclusion, what makes the constructive method problematic is that from a formal point of view, it commits the error of equating analytic reasoning with synthetic reasoning.455 However, had Sterzel’s interpretation of SL22:1 been conducted without any prejudices, then fraudulent non-disclosure, instead of being categorized as a crime and as such subject to punishment, would have been categorized and dealt with according to the principles of private law.456 According to the law at the time, the proper legal consequence and sanctions following from an act of disloyal non-disclosure, omissions of facts (the legal fact) should not be penal, but civil such as either, or both, annulment and damages, or in the absence of legal remedies, a moral sanction, such as general disapproval.457 Even though the logical integrity of a concept or an argument is essential for its validity,458 a concept of law may nevertheless be perfectly logical, cogent, and coherent, but still lack legal relevance. Law is not developed by means of legal concepts alone; on the contrary, law and its elements are defined and developed through an organic interaction between the concepts and general principles of law (inferred from the rules of law and the facts of law) and the rules and facts of law (defined by the concepts and general principles of law).The development of law is in fact a result of socio-economic matters as much as it is of purely legal matters. Or as Per-Olof Ekelöf recollects, Hägerström was of the firm opinion that the administration of justice could not be reduced to what Ekelöf calls a “Glasperlenspiel”, and reality must have to be introduced into the doctrines of jurisprudence.459 a ca l l f o r s c i e n t i f i c p u r i t y 521 455 Cf. Hägerström, “Svikligt förtigande,” pp. 317 and 334-335. 456 Cf. ibid.: p. 317. 457 Cf. ibid.: p. 314. 458 Ibid.: pp. 320-322. 459 Ekelöf, “Ett stycke vetenskapshistoria,” p. 79. 7. 4 summary and conclus ions : häge r ström’s judgment ove r the construct ive method
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjYyNDk=