Abstract

The work tackles the theme of the identity of legal science beginning from the idea that the multi-level systems have modified (or make it opportune to modify) the identity of legal science, and that the legal science and jurists that have to do with multi-level systems have (or would need) an identity different from the legal science of the traditional national systems. Through an examination of the aspects tied to doctrinal constructivism and to the topical method, to the relation between science and jurisprudence, and to the confrontation between globalization and legal doctrines, the aim of the work is to show, on the one hand, that in the 'discourses on method' of jurists there is very little methodology but, on the other hand, much 'ideology,' and as a consequence, that the very perception of what is wrong and the recipes for a 'methodological turn' are the fruit of ideological and not methodological options.