Difference as the Ontological Foundation of Legal Hermeneutics: A Theory in the Light of Deleuze and Derrida *

Abstract

Contemporary legal hermeneutics faces the challenge of bridging the gap between normative stability and interpretative plurality. This study investigates how Deleuze and Derrida’s philosophy of difference might overcome the tension between Kelsenian legal certainty and Dworkinian hermeneutical pluralism by conceiving difference as the ontological foundation of interpretation. As per its theoretical framework, the present work relies on the concepts of différance (Derrida), intensive difference (Deleuze), normative framework (Kelsen), and chain novel (Dworkin), articulating them to demonstrate that difference , far from compromising normative coherence, strengthens it through an open and contextualized interpretation. Methodologically, it is based on qualitative research, bibliography, and deductive analysis. Structured on three axes— difference as a social phenomenon, the analysis of the philosophical conceptions of Deleuze and Derrida, and the application of these ideas to legal hermeneutics—the study concludes that difference is inherent to interpretative practice. By embracing the multiplicity of meanings and the mutability of contexts, hermeneutics proves to be more capable of interpreting legal texts in line with the complexity of the contemporary world, transforming itself into an interpretative technique sensitive to plurality and change.