The book poses the fundamental question of what objectivity means in practical legal discourse and what is its role. By applying critical discourse analysis to the applications of the term "objectivity" in judicial discourse - based on cases from Poland - the book identifies a rich taxonomy of objectivity's uses that judges make of the concept of objectivity. The main results are that objectivity has a special meaning in the legal discourse based on legal authority, and that a case can be made for a stronger interconnection between objectivity and intersubjectivity. These results challenge the theoretical foundations of the debate on objectivity in the legal discourse and open new perspectives for the justification of this concept in modern societies.

This volume presents a collection of essays on objectivity in legal discourse. Has law a distinctive type of objectivity? Is there one specific type of legal objectivity or many, depending on the observatory language utilized? Is objectivity fit for law? The analyses in the various contributions show that the Cartesian paradigm of objectivity is not relevant to the current legal discourse, and new forms of legal objectivity are revealed instead. Each essay, in its distinctive way, analyses the strong commitment of law to objectivity, shedding light on the controversies that surround it.