A comparison of social constructionist and ethnomethodological descriptions of how a judge distinguished between the erotic and the obscene

Philosophy of the Social Sciences 24 (4):405-425 (1994)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

In 1985, a member of the Canadian judiciary handed down a written judgment in which he distinguished between erotica and obscene matter. The judgment attracted the scorn of some normative sociologists, who complained of the insufficiency of the social psychological research on which it was based. Their reaction prompts a review of the judgment in the light of social constructionism and of ethnomethodology; this, in turn, prompts a comparison of social constructionist and ethnomethodological methodologies, in which the legal judgment serves merely as a test case. It is argued that normative sociology and social constructionism, both being of an essentially ironic cast, occlude the judge's sense-making procedures, the very phenomena they purport to describe. Ethnomethodology, on the other hand, being nonironic, promises to capture those procedures.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 90,593

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
33 (#419,057)

6 months
2 (#668,348)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

The Law-Set: The Legal-Scientific Production of Medical Propriety.Gary Edmond - 2001 - Science, Technology, and Human Values 26 (2):191-226.
Using Legal Rules in an Indeterminate World.Benjamin Gregg - 1999 - Political Theory 27 (3):357-378.

Add more citations