Socio-Legal Agency in Late Modernity – Reappreciating the Relationship between Normativity and Sociology of Law*

Abstract

as a paper at a session organised by the Comit é de Recherche ' É tudes socio-juridiques -Sociologie du droit ' within the framework of the virtual 2021 conference of the Association internationale des sociologues de langue fran ç aise (AISLF) , and I want to thank the participants in that session for their stimulating comments. That Comit é welcomed Reza Banakar at the Toulouse RCSL meeting in 2013, where we discussed with him the topic of our sessions: ' Law and the Social Construction of Uncertainty ' . I thank Ulrike Schultz for inviting me to present this paper at the opening session of the 2021 Virtual RCSL Conference in September 2021, H å kan Hyd é n for authorising that presentation, and Roger Cotterrell for his inspiring reviewer ' s comments.1 This 1998 paper gave rise to several critical reactions, after which Banakar reformulated his arguments, without mentioning, however, the one about the ' ideological objectives ' : Banakar (2001). About the debate triggered by Banakar (1998a), see Motta (2021: 6). 163 About the relationship between social systems and norms, see Hyd é n (forthcoming). 4 The insider/outsider dichotomy, discussed by Banakar (1998a: 8) in the case of law, applies to all functionally differentiated activities developed in modern societies. On functional differentiation in modern society, see Luhmann 1997. 5 The question of how a normative discourse can be part of the scientifi c discourse cannot be adequately discussed within the framework of this short contribution. Two important criteria are: the fact that it is connected to scientifi c arguments, and that it is formulated in a context usually devoted to scientifi c debates. The two papers of Banakar already quoted may illustrate these criteria: Banakar (1998a) and ( 2001) defend mainly normative arguments of politics of legal sociology, in a journal which also publishes papers presenting the results of socio-legal research.6 Methodology is a concern for Banakar, not only in Banakar (2015: 5), but throughout his career. Remember in particular Banakar (2000) and Banakar and Travers (2005).