James Moylan
This is the full text of a doctoral thesis (in Law) that seeks to describe the body of literature that is associated with a seemingly intractable realm of argumentation - the Economic Analysis of Law. Over the course of eight chapters Dr Moylan considers how an ethnographically and semiotically informed modality of inquiry (after Barthes, Bourdieu, Geertz, et al.) can serve to promote an engagement with not just the propositions being advanced by those involved in argumentation, but also the epistemic and common knowledge framing factors that are serving to inform all sides of a debate in a range of sometimes uniform and sometimes diverse ways. In accord with these observations, the thesis not only examines a series of texts but also a range of cultural, linguistic and common knowledge factors that are implicated in supporting and informing the range of counterpoised propositions of argumentation that are in evidence. It is argued that it is significant that such a perspective of inquiry employs a language and focus of analysis that is largely unconcerned with the subject matter discriminations that are being commonly deemed as contentious, but which instead focusses on commonalities and contrasts in code discrimination and those aspects of common knowledge that are being appreciated as consequential in a variety of different arenas of discourse. By thus providing for an analytical perspective that is epistemically and culturally cognisant, yet also propositionally agnostic, a semiotically informed sensibility of analysis assists in enhancing communications relating to precisely those matters where this is of most consequence, which is regarding those instances of long-standing and widespread contention that are commonly described as constituting ’intractable arguments.’
