Legal reality as item of postclassic law philosophies

Cover Page

Cite item

Full Text

Abstract

The writer show important of philosophical understanding of the law existence. The legal philosophy is searching the ground of juridical science. Philosophy of science is not like a separate area of knowledge, existed closer with this scientific discipline, but her high level- the level of her grounds. In this level occur “contact” between worldview, philosophy and this scientific discipline. Philosophical knowledge (with ideological and everyday knowledge subjected to philosophical reflection) used for ontological and epistemological substantiation of science. Philosophy of science (like her according level) is not a science, but the knowledge and without this knowledge, science (and juridical science) is impossible. In this case the legal philosophy is the high level of jurisprudences provided ontological and methodological justification of law. Exactly legal philosophy allows juridical discipline come in “meta-legal” area, only from legal philosophy possible explication of legal grounds.

Post-classical philosophy formulates the following picture of legal reality: 1) law is created (constructed) by people; 2) law is conditioned by historical and socio — cultural context; 3) law is multifaceted, potentially inexhaustible in its external manifestations, phenomenon; 4) law exists in the sign form and practices (behavioral and discursive, mental) people. Post-classic right philosophy is characterized by anthropology and practical orientation.

Legal reality formulated by people and reproduced by their practices. The study of exactly how this happens is an important task of post — classical philosophy of law. This approach differs significantly from the classical one and is an adequate analysis of law in post-modern, global society.

About the authors

Ilya L. Chestnov

St. Petersburg Law Institute of the University of the Prosecutor of the RF

Author for correspondence.
Email: ichestnov@gmail.com

Doctor of Law, Professor of the Department of Theory and History of State and Law

Russian Federation, St. Petersburg

References

  1. Агацци Э. Научная объективность и ее контексты. М., 2017. 688 с.
  2. Бочкарёв С. А. Философия уголовного права: постановка вопроса: монография. М., 2019. 424 с.
  3. Варга Ч. Загадка права и правового мышления / Пер. с англ. и венгр.; cост. и науч. ред. М. В. Антонова. СПб., 2015. 409 с.
  4. Веденеев Ю. А. Грамматика правопорядка / Науч. ред. В. В. Лазарев. М., 2018. 232 с.
  5. Жалинский А. Э. Уголовное право в ожидании перемен: теоретико-инструментальный анализ. 2-е изд., перераб. и доп. М., 2009. 400 с.
  6. Марков Б. В. Люди и знаки: антропология межличностной коммуникации. СПб., 2011. 667 с.
  7. Мелкевик Б. Юридическая практика в зеркале философии права / Отв. ред. М. В. Антонов. СПб., 2015. 288 с.
  8. Пути развития философии права в России: Круглый стол Междисциплинарного центра философии права Института философии РАН. 7.12.2016, Москва (Гусейнов А. А., Стёпин В. С., Смирнов А. В., Чижков С. Л., Розин В. М., Тухватулина Л. А., Бондарь Н. С., Гаджиев Г. А., Графский В. Г., Лапаева В. В., Бочкарёв С. А., Керимов А. Д., Баренбойм П. Д., Захаров А. В., Войниканис Е. А.) // Российский журнал правовых исследований. 2017. № 1(10). С. 9-49.
  9. Сырых В. М. Российские правоведы на перепутье: материалистический рационализм или субъективный идеализм? // Журнал российского права. 2016. № 1. С. 75-89.

Copyright (c) 2019 Chestnov I.L.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies