Razionalità cartesiana, comparazione e variabili territoriali dell’asimmetria
MetadataShow full item record
The article critically examines the concept of ‘legal’ asymmetry as applied in federal comparative studies. Such assessment is facilitated by the comparative legal method, whose potentials are subversive and cross-disciplinary. In so doing, the article resorts to the paradigm American pragmatists elaborated when challenging Cartesian rationalism. Not only does asymmetry refer to the distribution of powers among levels of government, but it also reflects territorial interests, which comparative lawyers usually set at the margins of the constitutional narrative of asymmetry.