Call Us: US - +1 845 478 5244 | UK - +44 20 7193 7850 | AUS - +61 2 8005 4826

the Legal Reasoning

The chapter has shown that the normative process of doctrinal analysis is the defining characteristic of most legal scholarship. It has demonstrated how this places it within the humanities’ tradition with corresponding methodologies and cultural norms. As the built environment research community operates overwhelmingly within a scientific paradigm it embraces different methodologies and cultural norms from those traditionally associated with legal scholarship with consequent difficulties for communication. In common with other humanities’ disciplines, most legal scholarship is not concerned with empirical investigation, but with the analysis and manipulation of theoretical concepts. The methodologies employed therefore differ from those of the sciences and are probably more accurately categorised, in social science terms, as techniques of qualitative analysis. As has been seen, deductive and inductive logic, the use of analogical reasoning and policy analysis all feature strongly within this process. Crucially however, as the process is one of analysis rather than data collection, no purpose would be served by including a methodology section within a doctrinal research publication and one is never likely to find one. This is perhaps the most striking difference between the appearance of research outputs in the two traditions, and the one which has historically caused most difficulty for legal scholars when subject to peer review by other built environment researchers.