Abstract
Following Robert Cover's essay on law's “field of pain and death”, Austin Sarat and Thomas Kearns have presented the bases for a “jurisprudence of violence,” part of which requires including experiential accounts of (law's) violence in legal theory. This article explores these writers' understanding of violence, its relationships with law and the relevance of its experiential impact for jurisprudence, before focusing on two methodological issues. First, it argues that discussion of violence needs to be clearly situated and outlines a conceptual map as the basis for further analysis. Second, it questions the concept of experience in this context and addresses some key problems involved in articulating violent experience in textual discourse.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.