relationship between society (in the form of sociological knowledge) and law (dogmatic analysis) is analogous with that of Friedrich Julius Stahl and his “Rechtinstitutslehre”, wherein the practical utility of dogmatic constructions, conclusions, and findings rely upon their “correspondence” with other perspectives of society (such as the economic, sociological, ethical, historical) for their practical relevance and acceptance.14 Hägerström’s theory of legal science thus works in the spirit of the Historical School’s demand for increased practicality in jurisprudence. In conclusion, Hägerström’s determinations of the relationship between jurisprudence and sociological sciences from the 1930s,15 accordingly does not contradict his initial determination of 1904 that the empirical and dogmatic investigations of law are perspectives on law that are formally separate, with regard to their method, but materially united with regard to their object, law.16 a ca l l f o r s c i e n t i f i c p u r i t y 657 14 Wilhelm, Juristischen Methodenlehre, pp. 46-69; Sandström, Rättsvetenskapens princip, pp. 226-235. 15 Hägerström, “Gällande rätt.”; “Principundersökning.”; “Fundamental Problems.”; “Svikligt förtigande.” 16 Hägerström, Stat och rätt, p. 10.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjYyNDk=