Gnoseology of Law as a Component of Philosophical Gnoseology (General Reasoning)
Abstract
The purpose of the article consists in that, to attract attention of modern scientists in sphere of philosophy of right to labours of Ukrainian philosophical school of 1960th in area of general philosophy and philosophical gnosiology, and also to show that a number of positions of gnosiology of right are the constituents of corresponding positions of philosophical gnosiology, and that dialectical intercommunications of legal gnosiology with legal anthropology, praxeology, axiology and ontology predefined by dialectical intercommunications of philosophical gnosiology with philosophical anthropology, praxeology, axiology and ontology. Some researchers examine the copulas of legal gnoseology with other components of legal philosophy, foremost with legal ontology (in particular, А. М. Bernjukov, М. М. Proxhorov, О. С. Тarasov), but a legal gnoseology has dialectical copulas also with legal anthropology, praxeology and axiology. V. . Кuzmenko analyses a question about unity of legal ontology, anthropology, axiology and gnosiology, however only in connection with philosophical-legal conception of Thomas Aquinas, it is necessary to set a question wider. Methodology. Research methods are predefined by his character. Dialectical and system-structural methods, methods of logic, are used in the article foremost. The scientific novelty of the article is to attract the attention of modern specialists on the philosophy of law to the achievements of the Ukrainian school of 1960-ies because they can and should be extended to the philosophy of law and legal gnosiology in particular. Organic intercommunications of legal gnosiology with other major sections of the philosophy of law due to the presence of the organic interrelations of philosophical gnosiology with appropriate disciplines. Conclusions. Specialists in philosophy of law must deeper explore the heritage of Ukrainian philosophers of the sixties and the dialectics of legal anthropology, praxeology, axiology, ontology and gnosiology.
Keywords: gnosiology of right; philosophical gnosiology; philosophy of right; legal cognition; subject; object; truth; theory; idea; dialectics.
Downloads
References
Abbas P., Goudsmit A. Book Reviews. Journal of Legal Anthropology. 2019. Vol. 3. Issue 1. P. 103–108. doi: https://doi.org/10.3167/jla.2019.030108.
Бандура О. О. Гносеологія права як складова філософії права (загальні думки).Філософські та методологічні проблеми права. 2018. № 1–2 (15–16). С. 25–33. doi: https://doi.org/10.33270/02181602.
Baranov A. V. The problem of the formation of the basic concepts of matter, motion and energy in the context of the 21stcentury gnoseology and ontology. Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. 2018. Issue 435. P. 177–186. doi: 10.17223/15617793/435/23.
Бернюков А. М. Онтологія та гносеологія правової реальності: сучасний стан дослідження проблеми в Україні. Юридичний вісник «Повітряне та космічне право». 2014. Т. 3. № 32. С. 21–23. doi: 10.18372/2307-9061.32.8413.
Comaroff J. Does Anthropology Matter to Law? Journal of Legal Anthropology. 2018. Vol. 2. Issue 2. P. 72–78. doi: https://doi.org/10.3167/jla.2018.020206.
Dawson S. Aristotle’s gnoseology and understanding ‘understanding’ in practitioner research. Published online: 22 Feb 2019. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/09650792.2018.1553727.
Фатьянов И. В. Государственно-правовое моделирование: понятие и место в системе методов теории государства и права. Вестник Томского государственного университета. 2017. № 416. С. 191–195. doi: 10.17223/15617793/416/29
Фролова Е. А. Кистяковский Б. А. как методолог, философ и социолог права. Государствоиправо. 2019. № 3. C. 149–158. doi: 10.31857/S013207690004441-7.
Gardner D. Comment on cosmopolitan politesse. Journal of Legal Anthropology. 2019. Vol. 3. Issue 1. P. 85–93. doi: https://doi.org/10.3167/jla.2019.030106.
Hughes G. Introduction. Journal of Legal Anthropology. 2019. Vol. 3. Issue 1. P. 83–84. doi: https://doi.org/10.3167/jla.2019.030105.
Халиков А. Н. Философия права : учебник. М. : РИОР ; ИНФРА-М, 2017. 602 с. doi: https://doi.org/10.12737/22646.
Хельмянова Ю. С. Категория кажимости на современном этапе ее изучения. Žmogus ir žodis. Svetimosios kalbos Man and the Word Foreign Languages. 2016. Vol. 18. No. 3. Р. 40–49. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.15823/zz.
Kingsley J. J., Telle K. Does Anthropology Matter to Law? Journal of Legal Anthropology. 2018. Vol. 2. Issue 2.
P. 61–71. doi: https://doi.org/10.3167/jla.2018.020205.
Koch I. Turning Human Beings into Lawyers. Journal of Legal Anthropology. 2018. Vol. 2. Issue 2. P. 99–104. doi: https://doi.org/10.3167/jla.2018.020210.
Копнин П. В. Диалектика как логика и теория познания. М. : Наука, 1973. 324 с.
Копнин П. В. Гносеологические и логические основы науки. М. : Мысль, 1974. 568 с.
Кудрявцева А. В. Понимание истины в процессуальных отраслях права как выражение гносеологических моделей познания. Вестник Оренбургского государственного университета. 2006. № 3. С. 102–105. doi: 10.25198/1814-6457.
Kuzmenko V.V. Anthology, anthropology, axiology, gnoseology of Thomas Aquinas law conception. Naukovyy Visnyk Dnipropetrovs’kogo Derzhavnogo Universytetu Vnutrishnikh Sprav. 2019. Vol. 4. Issue 4. P. 11–19. doi: 10.31733/2078-3566-2018-6-11-19.
Ллойд Д. Идея права. Репрессивное зло или социальная необходимость? М. : Книгодел, 2006. 415 с.
Ложачевська О., Сидоренко К., Сіденко С. Глобальні закономірності розвитку світового ринку авіаційних перевезень. Міжнародна економічна політика. 2018. № 2 (29). С. 55–74. doi: 10.33111/iep.2018.29.03.
Луньков А. С. Философские основания миротворчества: пролегомены к проблеме. Logos et praxis. 2017. № 2. Т. 16. doi: https://doi.org/10.15688/ lp.jvolsu.2017.2.8.
Mammadov A., Gurbanov F. Logical and Gnoseology Analysis of Fuzzy Set Theory of Lotfi Zadeh. METAFIZIKA International Journal of Philosophy and Interdisciplinary Studies. 2019. Vol. 2. Issue 1. P. 7–29. doi: 10.33864/MTFZK.2019.26.
Merry Sally Engle. Does Law Matter to Anthropology? Journal of Legal Anthropology. 2018. Vol. 2. Issue 2. P. 86–91. doi: https://doi.org/10.3167/jla.2018.020208.
Midić I. The basic elements of the Orthodox gnoseology. Sabornost. 2018. Issue 12. P. 1–16. doi: 10.5937/sabornost1812001M.
Мишанкина Н. А. Прагматика научного дискурса.Вестник Новосибирского государственного педагогического университета. 2015. № 2. Т. 5. С. 126–133. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.15293/2226-3365.1502.12.
Peletz M. G. Why Anthropology Doesn’t Matter Much to Law. Journal of Legal Anthropology. 2018. Vol. 2. Issue 2. P. 92–98. doi: https://doi.org/10.3167/jla.2018.020209.
Прохоров М. М. Онтология, гносеология и онтогносеология. Философская мысль. 2017. № 4. С. 36–40. doi: 10.7256/2409-8728.2017.4.22418.
Прохоров М. М. Взаимосвязь онтологии и гносеологии как проблема современной отечественной философии. Вестник Северного (Арктического) федерального университета. 2017. № 2. С. 77–79. (Серия «Гуманитарные исоциальныенауки»). doi: 10.17238/issn2227-6564.2017.2.77.
Rapport N. The grey zone, distortion and the ownership of causation. Journal of Legal Anthropology. 2019. Vol. 3. Issue 1. P. 94–102. doi: https://doi.org/10.3167/jla.2019.030107.
Rosen L. Reconciling Anthropology and Law. Journal of Legal Anthropology. 2018. Vol. 2. Issue 2. P. 105–108. doi: https://doi.org/10.3167/jla.2018.020211.
Шинкарук В. И. Единство диалектики, логики и теории познания. Введение в диалектическую логику. Киев : Наук. думка, 1977. 364 с.
Человек и мир человека (Категории «человек» и «мир» в системе научного мировоззрения) : монография / [Шинкарук В. И., Иванов В. П., Молчанов И. Н. и др.] ; ред. В. И. Шинкарук. Киев : Наук. думка, 1977. 344 c.
Тарасов О. Структура міжнародно-правової реальності: онтологічний та гносеологічний аспекти. Філософія права і загальна теорія права. 2019. № 1. С. 168–174. doi: https://doi.org/10.21564/2227-7153.2019.1.186751.
Токовенко О. С. Суб’єктність політичного пізнання: гносеологічний вимір. Епістемологічні дослідження в філософії, соціальних і політичних науках. 2018. № 1 (1–2). С. 115–121. doi: https://doi.org/10.15421/341812.
Uzel K. Book Review. Journal of Legal Anthropology. 2018. Vol. 2. Issue 2. P. 122–124. doi: https://doi.org/10.3167/jla.2018.020214.
Wilson R. A. The digital ethnography of law. Journal of Legal Anthropology. 2019. Vol. 3. Issue 1. P. 1–20. doi: https://doi.org/10.3167/jla.2019.030101.
Abstract views: 452 PDF Downloads: 720
Copyright (c) 2020 Philosophical and Methodological Problems of Law
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
- Authors reserve the right to authorship of their own work and transfer to the magazine the right of the first publication of this work under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which allows other persons to freely distribute published work with mandatory reference to authors of the original work and the first publication of an article in this magazine.
- Authors have the right to enter into separate additional agreements on non-exclusive dissemination of the work in the form in which it was published in the journal (for example, to post an article in the institution's repository or to publish as part of a monograph), provided that the link to the first publication of the work in this journal is maintained.
- The journal's policy allows and encourages the posting of articles by authors on the Internet (for example, in electronic storehouses of institutions or on personal websites), both before the submission of this manuscript to the editorial office and during its editorial processing, as this contributes to the creation of a productive scientific discussion and positively affects the efficiency and dynamics of citing the published work.
