Abstract
The article aims to investigate why law texts are not able to control legal discourses. To this end, it situates the problem in the rhetorical philosophy of language and studies the incompatibility between general discourses and individual events. As legal texts cannot guarantee hermeneutical agreement, the article suggests the thesis that the meanings of texts and events are institutionalized through procedures.
Keywords:
Signifier and signified; Pyrrhonic skepticism; Indicators and predicators