A Greek word (antinomy) resulted in a Latin one (antinomy) and it reached our tongue What antinomy. The term refers to the contradiction that exists between two concepts or ideas.
For instance: “There is an antinomy between the projects proposed by the two political parties”, “The antinomy between offensive football and defensive football is behind us: today we know that the best teams are those that bet on balance”, “It is incredible that, in the XXI century, there are countries that are bleeding to death due to a religious antinomy”.
The antinomy reveals the existence of a nonsense that cannot be solved: the two antinomic principles appear opposed to each other. It is important to highlight that, in the field of philosophy, the antinomies are not necessarily linked to reason, since two principles can be rational and, in turn, be contradictory.
In everyday language, the notion of antinomy is often used with reference to a confrontation That seems impossible to solve due to the absence of common points or the presentation of discordant proposals. It is common for antinomies to arise in the realm of politics, when the proposals of different parties are very different. If one party proposes a free market economy and another wants a strong state presence to control economic variables, there is an antinomy between the two projects.
It is called antinomism, finally, to a religious movement that developed in the century XVI. Although it was part of Christianity, it was described as heretical because it held that faith was all that was needed, regardless of the sins that were committed.
The antinomy in law
In the field of right, the antinomy presents various nuances, which we must analyze to find the most appropriate solution to a given conflict. Many theorists have devoted their efforts to the elaboration of valuable documents that allow us to classify and study the different types of antinomy. In this case, we will focus on Norberto Bobbio’s theory, who relies on the scope of validity of the norms that lead the conflict, to establish a distinction between various kinds of antinomy.
If the two norms share the scope of validity, Bobbio points out that we are faced with a total-total antinomy. It is a case in which neither of the two can be applied without causing a conflict; for example, if one of them prohibits parking in a certain area from nine in the morning to twelve noon and the other, from ten in the morning to two in the afternoon. Compliance with one of them inevitably implies non-compliance with the other.
On the other hand we have the cases in which the scope of validity of the norms is not identical, and Bobbio groups them under the concept of partial-partial antinomy. This controversy It only occurs in the intersection portion between the two standards, as would happen if both prohibited parking during the same hours, but one focused on trucks and cars, and the other, on cars and bicycles.
The partial-partial antinomy presented in this example occurs only when the desire to park a bicycle or a truck in the prohibition zone arises, since both rules coincide with respect to cars.
The third type of antinomy recognized by Norberto Bobbio is called Subtotal, and occurs when the two conflicting norms have the same scope of validity, but one of them has a greater restriction. Returning to the example of the previous paragraphs, we could see this controversy if one rule absolutely prohibited any vehicle from parking, while the other only addressed trucks.