Static notions of social norms are often found in theories that approach law and society from a rational electoral perspective. Yuan`s contribution to this topic explains, for example, how social and legal norms have evolved over time in transnational business practice. These rules are intended to regulate the conduct of the parties in the conduct of their affairs. In this article, rational choice theories are used to explain the development of these norms in the field of transnational business law. In general, rational choice theories explain how the behaviour of individuals is influenced by a cost-benefit analysis.12x See, for example, the collection of articles in J. Elster (ed.), Rational Choice (1986). These theories approach society from an economic perspective in which individuals are viewed as rational, meaning that individuals aim to promote their preferences.13x For a discussion of these theories in the field of sociology, see, for example, C. Silling and P.A. Mellor, The Sociological Ambition: Elementary Forms of Social and Moral Life (2001), pp.
164-184, and in the field of criminology, R.H. Burke, An Introduction to Criminological Theory (2014), pp. 29-77. Theories that analyze how individuals determine which behavior benefits their preferences explain social norms in terms of costs and benefits. From the point of view of rational choice theories, some models of behaviour would be rational under certain circumstances and thus improve overall utility.14x T. Voss, `Game-theoretical Perspectives on the Emergence of Social Norms`, in M. Hechter and K. Opp (eds.), Social Norms (2001) 105. Social norms can therefore be explained in terms of consensus among rational individuals.15x Silling and Mellor, above no. 13, at 176. As rational choice theories point out that social norms exist because they bring benefits to individuals as a whole, 16x Voss, above No. 14, at 110ff.
Social norms must also be understood in light of these costs and benefits. A number of characteristics emerge from a rational decision-making perspective on law and society. First, by moving closer to social norms, implementation becomes an important problem from the point of view of rational decision-making. Social norms must be enforced, as stowaways can try to obtain benefits without incurring costs if they follow a social norm.17x Id. 113ff. The app therefore ensures that social norms are respected by individuals. Second, rational choice theories explain social norms, particularly at the level of individual behavior. Another static conception of social norms may be more fruitful if the relationship between law and society is to be approached from a macro perspective.
A macro perspective on the relationship between law and society, based on a static conception of social norms, is possible by approaching social norms in the sense of generally shared beliefs or values. Pei`s contribution to this topic explains, for example, how a particular form of alternative dispute resolution in the Chinese legal system, criminal reconciliation, is shaped by the widespread belief in Chinese society that disputes between individuals should be resolved informally. It describes from a historical perspective how this universally shared value is reflected in China`s criminal justice system. The idea of values as a signal of a general consensus within society is found in the work of sociologist Émile Durkheim. In his book The Division of Labor in Society, Durkheim distinguishes mechanical solidarity from organic solidarity.18x E. Durkheim, The Division of Labor in Society (1997). Mechanical solidarity exists in societies where individuals share the same values. Organic solidarity, on the other hand, exists in societies where individuals can pursue different values in the face of the division of labor. In his later work, however, Durkheim argues that individualism does provide a common frame of reference on the basis of which individuals within a society can pursue different values, provided they respect the autonomy of the other.19x See R. Cotterrell, Émile Durkheim: Law in a Moral Domain (1999), pp.
112-115. Durkheim`s ideas on solidarity show how a form of common consensus within society can lead to social norms. Static notions of social norms that emphasize shared beliefs or values can examine how a society`s values are reflected in a legal system. Durkheim, for example, argued that mechanical solidarity corresponded to a certain form of law that he called repressive law. Organic solidarity, on the other hand, is reflected in what Durkheim called reparation rights. Although Cotterrell argued that Durkheim did not share this view in his later work, 20x Id., 82ff. Durkheim`s ideas of values provide an intuitive understanding of the relationship between law and society. More generally, the idea that social values should be reflected in a legal system has been described as a mirror thesis by Tamanaha.21x Tamanaha, above No. 3.
By conceptualizing the relationship between law and society in this way, it can be examined whether the values generally shared in a society are adequately reflected in the law. Tamanaha also criticizes the mirror thesis. One of his criticisms is that society is in fact not reflected in the law, as the mirror thesis suggests. According to him, Western legal systems do not really reflect the substantive values of society. This, in turn, underscores the importance of procedures that ensure universal recognition of the law as valid.22x Id., 96ff. 30 Although not discussed in detail in the contributions to this issue, we, as editors, have been interested in how postmodern approaches to law and society would fit into the continuum of static and dynamic conceptions of social norms. In postmodern approaches, legal and social norms are seen as discursive practices that generate binary and hierarchical relations. Moreover, in a world of discourse, norms no longer prescribe behavior; They are performative. Postmodern approaches could therefore challenge our view that law and society can be explored in relation to norms. For postmodern approaches to law and society in general, see, for example, R. Banakar and M. Travers, “Section 5: Postmodernism.
Introduction”, in R. Banakar and M. Travers (eds.), Law and Social Theory (2013) 211, and contributions to this volume. 1 See, for example, discussion in M. Svensson, “Norms in Law and Society: Towards a Definition of the Socio-legal Concept of Norms,” in M. Baier (ed.), Social and Legal Norms: Towards a Socio-legal Understanding of Normativity (2013) 39. We have excluded moral norms on this issue, because our main concern is the relationship between legal and social norms. On moral norms in relation to social and legal norms, see, for example, G. Brennan, L.
Eriksson, R.E. Goodin & N. Southwood, Explaining Norms (2013), pp. 5-7. The doctrine of relationship is the principle that an action taken at a certain point in time is considered by a legal fiction to have been performed at an earlier time. For example, in the case of the transfer of immovable property, the final proceedings concluding the transfer of ownership are considered effective for certain purposes by taking effect on the date on which the first procedure took place. The relationship is essentially the legal concept of retroactivity. These sample sentences are automatically selected from various online information sources to reflect the current use of the word “static.” The views expressed in the examples do not represent the views of Merriam-Webster or its editors. Send us your feedback. Britannica English: Translation of static for Arabic speakers This issue of the Erasmus Law Review examines the relationship between law and society by examining different notions of social norms.