Open Access Research Article
Semantic Violence and Legal Research: Call to an Attention based approach – By Varaprad Pitkar
Published Paper
Article Details
Semantic Violence and Legal Research: Call to an
Attention based approach
Authored By -Varaprad Pitkar
Ph.D,
NALSAR University of Law
Hyderabad
Abstract
Violence, in
its broadest form, is not only an important qualification which may be
associated to specific events or actions, but also a general overarching
principle which can explain the entire system in its regulatory aspect. This
paper would deal with violence of meaning-making, at two levels – firstly, that
which is embodied in law as it exists in the world, and secondly, in writing on
law in its traditional doctrinal form, what is commonly known as legal
research. The central argument identifies attention as not merely one of the
components of perception of truth, but that of truth creation itself. The notion
of truth in law is seen as a set of guiding principles, which may form a
coherent teleology by itself, or at least an itinerary of disparate
non-derogable rules. Law review articles from reputed journals will be used to
illustrate the case in its particulars.
An
attention-based approach translates meaning-construction to feeling-production.
Language itself is not rejected, but rather interpreted as a form of
communication which concerns itself with semantics only in so far as it becomes
eventually available in attention. In this paper, RA Barkley’s framework of
Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder as ‘executive dysfunction’ is used to
map this notion of truth/telos/guiding principles – in an attention deficient
manner. Such an approach, for instance, would construct consistency as a series
of observed/attended to occurrences as against a single umbrella principle
which potentially implies the universe of all consistent events. In a
particular sense, it could be seen as bridging the gap between the referent and
the reference. On a general level, it is a limitation on universal categories
commonly posited in moral theory and law.
The violence of a semantic approach to
truth is explicit in cases such as when regimes of law presume an ‘individual’
to whom law would apply irrespective of identity or context. This tendency is
generally traced as a direct consequence of law’s ‘inherent’ normativity. An
attention-based approach discards the making of such presumptions prior to the
presentation of the referent in attention space. A related notion of
temporality will also be discussed; understood as a view which entails (at the
very least) two notions - that of a total time (potential), and the current
time variable for a given system. A temporal view is closely associated
with the prevailing view of truth as primarily a semantic function.
An appeal for linking the issue with
medical literature would be made, which would also provide recourse to a study
of coping mechanisms, which may then be similarly modelled on to social
scientific contexts. A study of different mechanisms of attention regulation
would allow for a genuine study of plurality of notions of truth. Such an
approach, it is argued, would also serve purposes of providing a distinct
methodology for the social sciences as well as alleviating the problem of
selection of the research object.
Keywords: Violence, Epistemic, Teleological, Information, Legal
Research, Temporal, Logic, Cultural, Attention Deficit, ADHD
I
Section II
summarizes the notion of truth, as utilized in this study, and problematizes
its application in certain types of instances. In Section III, we use the case
of doctrinal-legal research, in its formulation of ‘law as integrity’ by Ronald
Dworkin and in two case studies - one on the question of validity of the
recently passed Citizenship Amendment Act - and another on the International
Criminal Court. In Section IV, we introduce and try to bridge the notion of
truth with medical literature on Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder
(ADHD) in an attempt to provide a methodological alternative (to a semantic
notion) of ‘atten-truth’. Section V concludes the discussion.
II
What is truth? Modern day academic
writing would position it as per a ‘rationality of the particulars’. An inquiry
on the notion of truth within a particular discipline depends on the conditions
that are respected within it, and excavated by professionals of that
discipline. Then, the question becomes what are the conditions of a
common space that network these areas. This can be branched into two further
questions, firstly, about the conditions that could supply a unity to the space
which can facilitate transmission of information, secondly, whether such a set
of condition/s is required at all.
We argue here, in the affirmative to
the second question, if such a set of principles is absent and the rest of the
paper would aim to justify that answer, and at the same time, turning to the
first question – supply a methodology for it. In doing so, we adopt a conception
of truth as one
limited by our attention. There is no
objective truth even within a perfectly logical system. It is always limited by
the attention span of the constituents of the system. Rather than attempting to
map truth on logic, we abandon it as a formal construct. As a corollary, we also
pursue an idea of meaning which is similarly limited. The violence of enclosed
objective truth lies in its tendency to reject validity of other claims which
can have the quality of epistemic widening.
III
Legal research, as goes on in the legal
academy, can refer to a broad array of approaches which could include
methodologies commonly used in social sciences. Here we refer to the ‘limited’
style of research - which functions within enclosed methodological boundaries.
A limited style of research would entail a study of what is ‘good’ in law and
for the purpose, relevant applicable law is sought for any given case at hand.
The purpose of the exercise would be to ascertain the ‘correct’ law in any
given case. Correctness of a law depends on several factors which include a
proper chain of authority, as sanctioned within the law itself.
So for instance, if an act is committed
by an individual, which is contrary to what is permitted in a given legal
system they are a subject of, the said person will attract whichever sanction
is prescribed by law. A legal researcher, as described above, will attempt to
fit the act or the larger fact situation within the contours of law (Indian Penal
Code) which corresponds to it. For the legal researcher, it makes no sense to
question the legitimacy of the law, or to know the source of its validity. The
only point to note is that it is valid. Further questions are unnecessary
for the researcher, unless it is the legitimacy of a law which is the object of
study (Constitutional Validity). If one were to question further, and ask
questions of its legitimacy – the legal researcher and a philosopher would
branch into separate paths. The legal inquiry would stop at the last legally
relevant stage. This stage may be the Constitutional Document of a legal
system, a separate code specifying the same, or merely established
practice. The philosopher, on the other hand, would attempt to trace the
normative linkage to an ultimate conception – of society, power, utility or
something outside the realm law.
This becomes problematic when we
consider the normative enclosure of different disciplines. The insularity of
all of those disciplines, compounded with the fact that all of those follow a
different normative structure (and conception of truth) implies firstly,
seclusion of the norms themselves. For instance, integrity is an important norm
in law but has no identity outside purely descriptive disciplines. If we
examine legal research at the level of the first step, a similar problem of
multiplicity of ‘truths’ and ensuing indeterminacy and arbitrariness is
encountered. This leads to populating of the discourse with versions which are
equally valid with an equally rightful claim to discursive space.
Hence, we argue for an alternate
conception as a means of study, and drop the attempt to force the legitimacy to
an ultimate notion of truth AND instead relate this truth to attention span. As
the othered variable in the binary with truth. This linkage of truth to
attention span could be represented in an illustration where, equally valid contentions
are adjudicated as per their relation in attention space. Validity, which was
earlier the sole criterion becomes merely a favourable condition (neither
sufficient nor necessary). Among the several contentions vying for attention
space, those that appeal are selected for consideration. Attention spaces may
be defined as per our convenience, depending on the scope of the content under
consideration. It may range from a single individual to the entire public (in
cases where the subject matter demands so). By this exercise, we expect
patterns to emerge which are able to measure and co-incide better with
causation in the outside world. Some questions which would flow from this shift
could be : Where does the attention diver to? What is the appeal of this
contention? What is the time variable associated with this and how stimulating
in attention it is. To illustrate the point, we present a case study on the
recently passed Citizenship Amendment Act, 2019 (CAA).
The question of legality of the CAA is
at the heart of political discourse. But the question itself is incapable of
being reduced to a single answer. From the point of view of a legal researcher,
the first choice presents itself when the issue of whether there will infact be
a constitutional challenge in court is involved. In absence of that question, there
cannot be an answer to the contingent question of its constitutionality.
Considering we assume a hypothetical situation where it is actually so, the legal
researcher would have the choice of doing research with fidelity either to
integrity (as construed by him) or to a client. The research will follow
different paths and conclude different in either end. Further assuming it is
integrity that is the central notion, the different premises that may be
starting points along the axis of ‘aims’ or ‘goals’ could be – a. Constitutionality
b. Humanitarianism c. Personal Liberty While b. and c. may be considered as not
falling within a strictly legal formulation (although it may be argued to be),
even a. has several different sites of excavation to start with, few of which
are i. Division on the basis of religion ii. Equality iii. Socio Economic Betterment iv. Federalism. Even
if we were to narrow it further with a hierarchy of constitutional norms, we
will end up with further choices. Which is why, realist schools of legal theory
reject any attempt at finality or objectivity.
Purity of legal research may be
maintained by choosing any of the starting points, the only condition being
that the chain that follows from it should have integrity or be ‘good’ in law. So,
the regular legal method would produce a set of multiple logico-legal chains
which are completely consistent with each other. Two of these chains have
exactly opposite conclusions. The rest of the work is now in the realm of
selection. It is here that we apply the limiting criteria of attention span or
‘atten-truth’ as a method of regulating the same. Which chain would get a
preference over others – which chain appeals in a certain way – which
chain has relative longevity over others.
IV
A recourse to medical literature may
prove extremely valuable as a bridge to eventual mapping of ‘atten-truth’. More
particularly, we attempt to relate our discussion to Russell Barkley’s ‘Unified
Theory of Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder’. By and large, Barkley has
been the first to explain ADHD within the purview of a single concept, that of
executive function. Executive function (EF) is understood in Barkley’s terms as
being identical to what has been identified as self-regulation. ADHD, in turn
is understood as a disorder of self-regulation. The suggested solutions involve
controlling the environment so as to enhance the sense of self control. Closely
attached to it is the lack of a sense of time management. This may be
compensated by breaking down activities into smaller chunks and setting individual
time limits for those. Studies on ADHD have spanned a wide range of
participants and extensive subject matter.
Conceived as impairment of executive
function, an attention deficit may be analogically extended to functioning of
the public discursive space. This public space can and would include academic
space (as being qualitative non-distinct from it). What is an absence of a
master criteria of selection at the level of the network, a phenomenon (WC)
that we discussed at the level of selection of applicable law, or that of an
applicable premise, is, in the context of Attention deficit, an inability to
regulate attention. The attention space, in all three cases, the legal, the
academic-social and the psychological, does not have a set criteria or order of
appearance which conforms to the internal rationality of any its constituents.
An inability to manage time in ADHD is virtually unextrapolatable in the
context of academic discourse due to an absence of a single ‘objective’ or
‘goal’ variable, whereas in legal research discourse, it may be noticed in the
self-specified aims that law/legal research seeks to achieve, which may also be
empirically verified. The said analogy can be further utilised to link
solutions to the problem to coping mechanisms observed in persons with an
attention deficit. Some ideas, that of a ‘unifying emotion’ as a means of
overcoming the limitation of an impaired working memory – may be represented as
dominant discursive tendencies in the field of atten-truth. Stimulation seeking
is another property which may be assessed in any of those. Patterns in ADHD
based thought processes may be used as theoretic structures in foundation/premise
and academic discourses. Further, linguistic syntax mapping of ADHD may supply
constructs to measure discourse in other areas.
V
Concluding Remarks
We attempted to discuss the violence of
the notion of truth as it exists within smaller technical-discursive fields and
see how it reflects on their work and content production. The lack of a regulating
mechanism for equally valid propositions or claims is a problem faced across
areas. The conception of ‘atten-truth’ is a means to account for part of the
absence of regulation – in that it would give predictability to an otherwise
arbitrary looking process. Beyond this, we also made a general call to
understand ADHD as not only psychological, but also a property of several
levels of public discourse which lack regulation. A larger research agenda,
preferably within a number of sub-disciplines would have a potent harvest.
Article Information
Semantic Violence and Legal Research: Call to an Attention based approach – By Varaprad Pitkar
Authors: Varaprad Pitkar
- Journal IJLRA
- ISSN 2582-6433
- Published 2022/11/07
- Volume 2
- Issue 7
About Journal
International Journal for Legal Research and Analysis
- Abbreviation IJLRA
- ISSN 2582-6433
- Access Open Access
- License CC 4.0
All research articles published in International Journal for Legal Research and Analysis are open access and available to read, download and share, subject to proper citation of the original work.
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of International Journal for Legal Research and Analysis.