Marcelo Neves: Symbolic Law, Debate, and Social Order
Marcelo Neves: Symbolic Law and Social Order
2.1: From Symbolic Law: A Debate Propellant, Marcelo Neves
Falbo by: From an instrumental point of view, law is identified as a means to an end (to maintain order, resolve conflicts), a means for achieving a normatively social order. The law identifies the normative point of view with an instrumental function. Law as a standard and, as a rule, seeking a means to an end. Size Visible (perceived). Studied further during the course.
Law as a reality meets another dimension: the symbolic dimension of political or ideological. Exists but is not perceived. Invisible Dimension.
A break in the study of law occurs when law school sticks to the factual dimension (the first).
Dimension X Dimension: factual vs. symbolic.
We do not have access to the reality of law, but only one dimension.
Socially, from the economic point of view, the lens is surrounded by capitalist contracts. Without a contract, there is no capitalist society. The ideological basis of the contract: equality in freedom. Ideologically, equality in freedom constituted a political-ideological dimension of the eighteenth century. In fact, are the parties equal in society? No! Employer and employee, landlord and tenant are different. In fact, relations are linking people who occupy different social conditions. But from the standpoint of political-ideological, symbolic, they are matched by ensuring the existence of contracts.
Symbolic dimension: equalized; factual dimension: distinguished, unequal materially. Materially, there is a reproduction of the differences and inequalities.
In the course of law, the symbolic dimension is not; not appearing, a dimension of law is not studied. Thus, the contradictions of the law do not appear, the law does not appear as a result of conflict, but as a resolver of conflicts. We depart from the principle that the right turns to organize life in society; it is not viewed as a conflict. If the law exists as a means to an end (conflict resolution), it cannot be seen as a result of conflict or conflicts.
By studying the law only through its factual dimension, we do not understand the political and ideological basis of law, thus compromising the study of law as a whole.
The judiciary, when fired due to a conflict, the parties do not look at the world, but the parties as parties, within a context. Party as a party in relation to a whole. Itemization of parts. This demonstrates a crisis or change in the judiciary, which relate to the parties, which are individualized; they are part of a social whole, then showing up the contradictions and social conflicts. Thus, the law does not appear as capable of solving conflicts. Eg, if every time there was a dump (taking into account that the judiciary applies the law) the conflict was resolved, there would be no evictions.
From a structural standpoint, the world does not change when justice decides; the socio-economic structures are not changed. We have to approach the real well for understanding reality. If we turn from the symbolic, we are far from understanding the real. Limited view. Symbolic (Bourdieu) which is not explained, but there (hidden subject in Portuguese). Marcelo Neves
Not everyone has a right end; not all rights are means to an end. There will be no right to hold any normative role. The company thinks that every right has a role to an end, believes that the right has a vocation to be a means to an end. This view is confirmed by Marcelo Neves DaMatta view: Feeding the law itself is the belief that society has the right to be a means to an end.
The right, from the symbolic point of view, has a role in calming social tensions, or a way to cushion society, politically, is unarmed. Comfort. A society that believes in the right discusses not only expect more and more rights. For Marcelo Neves, law, from the symbolic point of view, should not be viewed as one written in a relationship in itself is not the right means to an end, the no right turn to in a society normatively orient people so they can solve their problems.
Eg Quota Law – from the real point of view, the problem of education in Brazil knows no ethnic distinction. PROBLEM: anyone can claim an Indian heritage, black, etc. and claim rights; the entire society is affected, even if it ensures access to higher education, prejudice cannot be prevented (by implication). The change in law does not necessarily guarantee social change.