Lojo, A. & Presi, V. (2025). From Concepts to Metaphysics: A Conversation with Andrei Marmor, Notizie di POLITEIA, XLI, 157, 2025. ISSN 1128-2401 pp. 122-130.
Abstract: In this interview, Andrei Marmor offers a few personal insights on the relation within social ontology and philosophy of law, addressing main issues of his interest – such as the nature of the relation between rules and practices. Moreover, he reflects about the metaphysical turn in jurisprudence, Hart’s internal and external points of view and the contemporary impact of Kelsen.
Presi, V. (2024). Social and Legal Entities as Phenomena: An Inquiry About the Method of Addressing Boundaries Between Social Ontology and Ontology of Law. In: P. Theodorou, P.M.S. Alves, & A.I. Baka, (Eds.), Phenomenology of Law and Normativity. Contributions to Phenomenology, vol 133. Springer, Cham, 2024. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-031-68705-1_9
Abstract: This Chapter deals with the ontological problem of classifying entities strictly as social or legal. Therefore, the aim is to find a key of access to the unclear boundaries between social ontology and ontology of law. To do this, this Chapter will adopt a history of philosophy approach, offering an inquiry about the nature and the functioning of social and legal entities. It will appeal to Émile Durkheim’s intuition about social fact, Hans Kelsen’s theory about legal assignment of meaning, and Norberto Bobbio’s remarks on phenomenology applied to social sciences. The argument is that sourcing from sociology, social ontology, philosophy of law and phenomenology could represent a turning point to overcome few limits of the systematic ontological classification. In fact, adopting the only ontological perspective on this problem leads the research into the hypothesis whether social ontology is a subset of ontology of law and vice versa. Instead, a broader perspective allows us to grasp the nature of social and legal entities as facts, acts, and phenomena.
Presi, V. (2024). Analytical Philosophies of ‘Custom’: Georg Henrik von Wright and Bruno Celano, in Milan Law Review, Vol. 5, n. 1, pp. 94-117, DOI: 10.54103/milanlawreview/24206.
Abstract: In the tradition of analytical philosophy of norms, the subject of custom has received limited attention. This paper seeks to address whether the term ‘custom’ denotes a univocal phenomenon or encompasses various normative phenomena due to its polysemy. To this end, this paper examines the perspectives offered by the Finnish philosopher Georg Henrik von Wright and the Italian philosopher of law Bruno Celano. These two analyses offer distinct responses to the question: What do we refer to when we say, ‘custom’? Overall, this paper contends that a redefinition of the nature of customs could not be separated from a preliminary analysis of the uses and the meaning of the term ‘custom’, representing a methodological rephrasing of the research at hand.
Presi, V. (2023). Custom in Action. Ferdinand Tönnies’ Ontology of the Normative, Phenomenology and Mind, n. 24, pp. 192-203.
DOI: 10.17454/pam-2414.
Abstract: This paper deals with custom in action, namely, with the relationship between custom and action against the background of Amedeo Giovanni Conte’s nomotropism. Starting with Frerichs’ provocation of the peculiarity of saying ‘handeln nach der Sitte’ (acting according to custom) in favor of ‘sich handelnd nach was üblich ist’ (acting after what is usual), this paper will begin an exploratory research regarding the semantics and the ontology of custom to investigate the possibility of a nomotropic behavior in the field of custom. Therefore, this paper will quote, at first, Rudolf von Jhering’s theory, and, at second, Ferdinand Tönnies’ theory. In conclusion, this paper suggests that an inquiry into custom in action (and in particular Tönnies’ ontology of the normative) could benefit from the nomotropic categories of analysis – such as adeontic and deontic regularities.
Presi, V. (2023). Sittengesetz in Rudolf von Jhering: la teoria del costume tra sociologia del diritto e ontologia sociale, Sociologia del diritto, vol. 50, n. 1, 2023, pp. 61-87. DOI: 10.54103/1972-5760/20935.
Abstract: Nel 2021 la casa editrice Aragno ha pubblicato la traduzione italiana del secondo volume dello Scopo nel diritto (1883, 1886) di Rudolf von Jhering a cura di Mario G. Losano. Il presente contributo nasce dalla volontà di mettere in evidenza i punti salienti del suddetto testo, mettendo in risalto le ragioni che hanno portato alla genesi del secondo volume e il metodo sociologico ante litteram jheringhiano. Dopo aver sottolineato le innovazioni concettuali del secondo volume rispetto al primo, il contributo proporrà un’analisi dettagliata della teoria del costume di Jhering attraverso una quadruplice lettura, ossia il costume come azione sociale, il costume come norma vincolante, il costume come un’istituzione sociale e il costume come un dovere sociale in rapporto alla morale e al diritto. Quantunque Jhering sia reputato come uno degli autori che hanno anticipato alcuni dei temi della sociologia del diritto, il presente contributo argomenterà come alcune intuizioni – in particolare riguardo la natura delle istituzioni sociali, la normatività delle norme del costume e le regole costitutive – rendano Jhering un precursore anche dell’ontologia sociale.