Book Review: Living Law: Reconsidering Eugen Ehrlich, by Marc Hertogh (ed)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A CLASSIC FIGURE of legal sociology and -one of the most important theoreticians of legal pluralism to date.Born in Czernowitz in what was then the province of Bukovina in Austria-Hungary (now Chernivtsi in Ukraine), Ehrlich was trained as a jurist and legal historian, specializing in Roman law.He later became the rector of the German-speaking Franz-Josef University of Czernowitz.Alongside Hermann Kantorowicz, he was one the founders of the German legal realist "free-law movement" ("Freirechtsbewegung"), which influenced, among others, its American counterparts: sociological jurisprudence and legal realism.However, Ehrlich's most outstanding and lasting achievement was in the field of legal sociology, with his opus magnum called the Fundamental Principles of the Sociology of Law (Grundlegung der Soziologie desRechts).' Erhlich was of Jewish descent and therefore was forced to resign from his post at Czernowitz after the First World War because of rising nationalist and anti-Semitic sentiments.He died in Vienna in 1922.Although a significant number of articles have been published in English about Ehrlich's relevance for legal sociology, there has not been an English book dedicated in its entirety to this important scholar until now.The publication of the collective work Living Law: Reconsidering Eugen Ehrlich (Living Law), which is based on an international workshop held in May 2006 at the Ofiati Institute for the Sociology of Law (in the Spanish Basque Country), is, indeed, most
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.019 | 0.011 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.009 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".