Melola Discovery

← Melola Discovery

Jurnal SINTA 1

Critical Reflections on The Legal Science

Jurnal IUS (Kajian Hukum dan Keadilan) · Vol. 7 No. 3 (2019) · hlm. 348–359

DOI
10.29303/ius.v7i3.719
ISSN
2477-815X, 2303-3827
Terbit
2019-12-16
Penerbit
Magister of Law, Faculty of Law, University of Mataram
Bahasa
eng

Abstrak

Generally, there are two opposing sides when discussing the epistemology of the law, namely realist and anti-realist. The point of difference between the two sides includes several topics responding to the basic topics related to the definition, scope, methodology and truth that want to be achieved by the science of law. This research aims are to answer some of the epistemological problems of jurisprudence and what philosophical assumptions based on and methodological implications for achieving truth in realist and anti-realist tensions. This article uses a conceptual review of the epistemic study of law. The result of this research is that the epistemology discourse of jurisprudence has been a topic of debate for a long time and stems from tensions between rationalism, empiricism, and pragmatism. Methodological differences also have logical consequences for the attainment of the truth that realists and anti-realists aim to address. Correspondence becomes the truth to be achieved by law according to the realist. In contrast to the belief of anti-realists who believe that the truth is not just a statement, but it becomes true if it fits and supports with other statements. Whereas pragmatic assumes the validity of the law is measured by its validity at its usefulness.

Kata kunci

Jaringan kolaborasi para penulis

2 penulis · 1 tautan kepenulisan bersama · 1 lintas organisasi

Arahkan kursor atau ketuk sebuah nama untuk menyorot rekan penulisnya. Klik dua kali untuk membuka halaman penulis.

  • Universitas Hang Tuah
  • Universitas Negeri Surabaya
  • Organisasi berbeda
  • Organisasi sama
  • Afiliasi tidak diketahui
  • Garis lebih tebal = lebih banyak artikel bersama · lingkaran lebih besar = lebih banyak artikel
Tampilkan sebagai tabel
Rekan penulisOrganisasiArtikel bersama
Emmilia RusdianaUniversitas Negeri Surabaya1

Afiliasi berasal dari OpenAlex; metadata OAI-PMH jurnal tidak memuatnya. Penulis tanpa ID OpenAlex dicocokkan berdasarkan nama, sehingga dua orang bisa tergabung atau satu orang bisa terpisah.

Sumber metadata: OAI-PMH (metadata jurnal) http://jurnalius.ac.id/ojs/index.php/jurnalIUS/oai, pertama di-harvest 9 Nov 2026, terakhir terlihat 9 Nov 2026.
Metadata asli (oai_dc) 
<oai_dc:dc xmlns="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:oai_dc="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/  http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc.xsd">
	<dc:title xml:lang="en-US">Critical Reflections on The Legal Science</dc:title>
	<dc:creator>Setyowati, Dewi</dc:creator>
	<dc:subject xml:lang="en-US">Realist</dc:subject>
	<dc:subject xml:lang="en-US">Anti-realist</dc:subject>
	<dc:subject xml:lang="en-US">Epistemology</dc:subject>
	<dc:subject xml:lang="en-US">Truth</dc:subject>
	<dc:subject xml:lang="en-US">Methodology</dc:subject>
	<dc:description xml:lang="en-US">Generally, there are two opposing sides when discussing the epistemology of the law, namely realist and anti-realist. The point of difference between the two sides includes several topics responding to the basic topics related to the definition, scope, methodology and truth that want to be achieved by the science of law. This research aims are to answer some of the epistemological problems of jurisprudence and what philosophical assumptions based on and methodological implications for achieving truth in realist and anti-realist tensions. This article uses a conceptual review of the epistemic study of law. The result of this research is that the epistemology discourse of jurisprudence has been a topic of debate for a long time and stems from tensions between rationalism, empiricism, and pragmatism. Methodological differences also have logical consequences for the attainment of the truth that realists and anti-realists aim to address. Correspondence becomes the truth to be achieved by law according to the realist. In contrast to the belief of anti-realists who believe that the truth is not just a statement, but it becomes true if it fits and supports with other statements. Whereas pragmatic assumes the validity of the law is measured by its validity at its usefulness.</dc:description>
	<dc:publisher xml:lang="en-US">Magister of Law, Faculty of Law, University of Mataram</dc:publisher>
	<dc:date>2019-12-16</dc:date>
	<dc:type>info:eu-repo/semantics/article</dc:type>
	<dc:type>info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion</dc:type>
	<dc:type xml:lang="en-US">Peer-Reviewed Article</dc:type>
	<dc:format>application/pdf</dc:format>
	<dc:identifier>https://jurnalius.ac.id/ojs/index.php/jurnalIUS/article/view/719</dc:identifier>
	<dc:identifier>10.29303/ius.v7i3.719</dc:identifier>
	<dc:source xml:lang="en-US">Jurnal IUS Kajian Hukum dan Keadilan; Vol. 7 No. 3 (2019); 348-359</dc:source>
	<dc:source>2477-815X</dc:source>
	<dc:source>2303-3827</dc:source>
	<dc:source>10.29303/ius.v7i3</dc:source>
	<dc:language>eng</dc:language>
	<dc:relation>https://jurnalius.ac.id/ojs/index.php/jurnalIUS/article/view/719/pdf_125</dc:relation>
	<dc:rights xml:lang="en-US">Copyright (c) 2019 Dewi Setyowati</dc:rights>
</oai_dc:dc>