Term "method" in Greek means the way to the goal. In relation to knowledge, it is used in the sense of "the path to knowledge", "the path to the truth." The concept of " method» is defined as a way of action, a type of techniques and operations that guide cognition. This method always reflects the properties of the object and the subjective capabilities of the researcher.

It should be noted that the problem of developing and defining methods scientific knowledge and their structure directly depends on the understanding of the entire toolkit of scientific knowledge. However, in order to skillfully use the entire arsenal of legal methods, it is important to understand the subject of legal science, and it is also necessary to establish what its object represents, i.e. what phenomena of social and natural reality it studies, what are the frameworks for considering the sides of these phenomena, the place and role of this science in the general system of sciences. The problem of understanding the object and subject of legal science sets the vector for the correct use of the methodology of scientific knowledge.

So, in this case, you must be guided by the following starting points: what are the phenomena of the real world, what subjects or what aspects of phenomena are studied by this science? Having received answers to these questions, we will be able to determine its nature (content), place and purpose. Moreover, the status of science is mainly determined by its subject, and not by the object of knowledge. Its relationship with other sciences also depends on this, that is, what place it occupies in the system of objective knowledge. This criterion is not arbitrary, but strictly scientific, since it proceeds from the objective world of phenomena, from the characteristics of the very objects of knowledge of each science. The diversity of the world of phenomena corresponds to the diversity of sciences. And the more versatile and deep the society's self-knowledge of the objective (relatively independent) world becomes, the more the system of knowledge about reality is differentiated, new independent branches of knowledge appear. And since science reflects the activities of people and society and is called upon to help in solving practical problems, the system of sciences is in direct connection with practice, which brings to life new phenomena of reality and eliminates old, obsolete ones. It follows from this that there is not and cannot be eternal and unchanged for all times and peoples, the only suitable system of knowledge and methods of cognition. However, this does not mean that there are no stable patterns of social and social development in the world. natural life that are known by science. They exist, it's just that society is only now beginning to approach them with a strictly scientific criterion of knowledge. Knowledge, like reality, has a multi-level structure, different times and eras have their own level of cognition, so it is impossible to know everything at once, otherwise social development will stop. The changes taking place in the system of sciences, the nature, the subject of each science, have objective grounds (development of social consciousness and life activity), and are not the result of any arbitrary subjective grouping of knowledge.

The system of scientific knowledge changes and develops along with the development of society, its consciousness. As society is, so is knowledge, and vice versa. Strictly speaking, knowledge (science) is the ideal (correct) form of communication between society and the outside world, reality. The more objective (adequate to reality) and wider society's knowledge of the world, the more harmonious society is "embedded" in this world as an integral part of it. This way of harmonious coexistence of man and nature is called coevolutionary.

Obviously, each science is a certain way of reproducing and accumulating knowledge about the objects it studies. Any science has not only its own object, but also its own "subject", its own "subject" and "method" of research. These scientific elements (subject, object, subject and method) characterize the methodological basis of knowledge. In this way, an object Science is what is still subject to versatile scientific study, those phenomena and processes of social or natural reality, what the scientific knowledge of the subject is aimed at with the help of a system of methods.

In the process of scientific study, the initial empirical facts, knowledge about objects are supplemented by theoretical knowledge, i.e., a system of concepts about all the essential and formal properties, signs and characteristics of an object, about the laws of its genesis, life and development. Any object of social or natural reality has its own life (like a person), its periods and the content of this life, i.e., the change of its internal states in a certain environment. Scientific (theoretical) knowledge is thus a creative process of deep (intellectual and psychophysical) comprehension of the object under study by a scientist, in the creation of its mentally projected image in the form of a certain system of concepts and structures about the properties of the object.

Jurisprudence learns the laws of law and the state from the formulation of general problems of a theoretical-categorical and methodological order, allowing to develop one or another "cognitive type" (stereotype) of thinking and understanding the objects of the world in their interaction, which, in particular, is characteristic of basic legal science - theory of state and law. Here we mean the definition of those necessary primary, basic terms that reflect the phenomena or processes studied by science. Traditionally, such terms are "object", "subject" and "method" to be studied. Since the jurisprudence material is rather strongly individualized and is difficult to structure and typify, this limits its expression in the “exact language”. Mathematical scientific procedures are also applied in this field of knowledge. And, of course, in the state-legal sphere there are objective laws, their identification and adherence to them is the most important task of legal science. However, these, as they are called, “inaccurate”, “vague” laws, “patterns-trends”, which are difficult to reveal and see, form an integral part of the spiritual sphere of the life of society and the individual.

Thus, the object of the theory of state and law is the state and law as social phenomena and reality, the subject is regularities, i.e., stable connections learned with the help of philosophical, general scientific, private scientific and special scientific methods of study.

legal science gives answers to the basic, fundamental questions about the state and law, which are important for all legal sciences, applying the provisions of all social sciences. It is in constant development and improvement, being in demand for solving practical problems of state-legal life.

§ 2. Methodology as a system of scientific methods

It is well known that it is quite problematic today to give a strict definition of the methodology of science, as well as the science itself or a separate method of scientific knowledge, satisfying all implemented approaches and ways of understanding. At the same time, this must be done in order to understand the specific phenomenon - the methodology of legal science. With that said, methodology of science can be characterized as studies carried out at various levels (philosophical, general scientific, specific sciences, methods and techniques) of the general foundations, ways, patterns of scientific knowledge, its principles and methods, aimed at developing provisions that allow choosing means and building procedures for effectively solving problems and tasks arising in the process of research activities.

Among the generally accepted provisions on the methodology of science, the following can be distinguished character traits this component of science:

• the methodology of science is recognized as a system of methods (a set of methods) by which the subject of knowledge is studied;
• the methodology of science is the doctrine of methods, a special science (epistemology), which sets as its immediate goal and task the development and improvement of a system of techniques and methods of scientific knowledge. For "logos" cannot be anything other than a doctrine, a thought, a concept.

The methodology of science as part of philosophy and an independent scientific discipline contains knowledge about:

• what techniques and methods of scientific knowledge should be used in the knowledge of the subject of science;
• what techniques and methods of cognition should be carried out in a particular research procedure;
• what is the content of specific techniques, methods used to cognize the world, its laws;
• how methods are interconnected in the process of cognition, movement to new knowledge in the process of ascent from the concrete to the abstract, and vice versa, from the abstract to the concrete.

Understood in this way, methodology is not a method in the proper sense of the word. And the identification of methodology as a science with its object (or any separate method) is just as incorrect as philosophy with its studied phenomena: society, consciousness and being.

The methodology of science is of an objective nature, the knowledge and use of individual methods of knowledge requires special studies. The methodology of science, like any other theory, is in constant development, improvement, complements imperfect and incomplete ideas about the methods of cognition with new, more accurate and more complete knowledge.

To solve cognitive scientific problems, a variety of methods are used, which can be classified according to various grounds. The most common basis for classifying methods of cognition is the degree of generality. On this basis, four groups of methods are distinguished: philosophical methods, general scientific methods, particular scientific methods and special methods knowledge.

The named structure of the methodology of cognition (system of methods), as a rule, is perceived and applied by the researcher not dissectedly, but in integrity and totality. The choice of methods is related to various reasons. First of all, it is determined by the nature of the problem under study, research tasks, object and subject of research. For example, when studying the characteristics of a particular state that organizes social life in a given society, one can use a systemic or structural-functional method. This will allow the researcher to understand what underlies the life of a given society, which bodies manage it, in what areas, who exercises power, in what forms and methods, etc.

§ 3. Methodology of legal science as a science

Historically, the process of formation of the methodology of legal science is due to the development of the practical activities of society, the accumulation of experience of legal life in various spheres of life and, as a result, the development of public consciousness, its legal way of thinking. The history of ideas about law, its comprehension, interpretation and knowledge has gone approximately the same way as the history of science as a system of knowledge as a whole. It usually includes the following periods: philosophical-practical, theoretical-empirical and reflexive-practical. First period covers the legal thought of antiquity, the Middle Ages and a significant part of the New Age, while second And third periods mainly date back to the end of the 18th century. and XX century.

In general, the evolutionary (gradual) development of law, the improvement of legal activity, law-making and legal technique, and at the same time a critical understanding of the created and functioning law was marked by the emergence of a special type of social activity - scientific and doctrinal, aimed at understanding the general laws of legal life and the evolution of law . This circumstance, in turn, gave a direct impetus to the emergence of the foundations of the methodology of legal science as a section of legal knowledge that deals with the development and application of certain methods of studying law and legal reality.

It should be noted that today the study of legal methodology in domestic science provides a wide field for the creative use of the entire arsenal of cognition methods. The current Constitution of the Russian Federation enshrines “ideological diversity” and “freedom of literary, artistic, scientific, technical and other types of creativity, teaching”, which allows more relaxed use of the methodological basis of legal research, without looking back at political processes and conjuncture, there is no need to build your conclusions on the basis of any mandatory philosophical approach.

In this regard, according to a number of jurists, an adequate understanding of legal changes, effective research of new realities in the life of society require a serious study of the system of theoretical ideas, a revision of the philosophical foundations and methodology of scientific knowledge of law and legal phenomena. An analysis of scientific proposals to overcome the crisis of theoretical legal consciousness shows the unity of positions of all jurists that it should be such a legal science that will describe and explain legal reality in a new, holistic, integrated way.

It is no coincidence that domestic legal science increasingly began to address issues of legal methodology, which is dictated by the need to more accurately and objectively understand and explain the process of evolution of law and the diverse legal world, to establish links (properties) between various legal phenomena that affect social development. In other words, legal science cognizes not only the legal phenomena themselves in their development (dialectics), but the very methods that allow one to penetrate deep into the legal and non-legal phenomena of the world around.

As Russian legal theorist L. I. Spiridonov notes, at a certain stage, the methodology of legal knowledge stands out as an independent phenomenon and becomes a separate phenomenon in the study of the theory of state and law. In other words, it is required to show how and why the empirical study of individual manifestations of law is replaced by the need for a theoretical and generalized (philosophical) understanding of the unity of various aspects of legal reality, which allows developing a system of techniques and methods (categories and concepts) for understanding all legal phenomena from the position systemic, i.e. universal methodological view.

Among theorists of state and law, there are many different approaches to the interpretation of methodology in general and the methodology of the theory of state and law in particular. There are a number of levels of methodology in general and in the theory of state and law (these are philosophical, general scientific and concrete scientific levels).

In particular, philosophy as a methodology equips the theorist of state and law with knowledge of the most general laws of the development of nature, society and thinking, allows you to cover the world in its entirety, determine the place of this or that problem of state and law being studied among many others, its connection with them, etc. e. In essence, philosophy as a methodology is a kind of searchlight that illuminates the path of a lawyer into the unknown. Of course, we are talking about scientific philosophy, about dialectical and historical materialism, about dialectics, for which it is essential that it takes things in their mutual connection, in their movement, in their emergence and development. Philosophy in this sense becomes a methodology in the process of action, in the process of its application in legal science and practice, use to penetrate the secrets of legal matter.

The interpretation of philosophy as a methodology has the following aspects:

• firstly, philosophy is considered as a theoretical and ideological foundation and as an initial set of methods in state-legal research;
• secondly, it is possible to apply general scientific provisions and conclusions of interdisciplinary research in the process of cognition of the state and law;
• thirdly, the problem of methodology is expanding, which makes it possible to bring it to its logical conclusion;
• fourthly, there is a subjective transformation into the objective, the abstract into the concrete, the theory of state and law becomes a means of effectively influencing social relations;
• fifthly, the whole complex of methodology components significantly expands and deepens the means of substantiating and proving the results achieved in the process of studying the problems of state and law, introducing scientific knowledge into legal practice.

Objectively speaking, the formation of legal methodology in the current period is accompanied by numerous conceptual difficulties and contradictions, primarily of an ideological nature: seemingly previously unshakable postulates are collapsing and on their basis many new provisions are born, some of which are introduced into legal consciousness in a short time, and then die off. . All this, first of all, is due to dynamic changes in the entire legal reality. modern society.

The theoretical and conceptual boundaries of this area of ​​legal science are changing rapidly, while introducing "new" categories, approaches and techniques (for example, "legal hermeneutics", "legal semantics", "legal cybernetics", "legal semiotics", "legal linguistics”, “legal metatheory”, “legal synergetics”, etc.) are stunning in their figurativeness, scale and even metaphorical ambiguity. Recently, especially, the metatheoretical knowledge of legal science has become increasingly important, since science has accumulated a significant amount of problems and questions that need to be generalized and built from a methodological (system of concepts) point of view, and this requires access to a higher level of knowledge - self-reflection of the theory of law. All these processes and phenomena in legal science are natural and inevitable: the development of science, as you know, is always accompanied by signs of a crisis in the growth of scientific knowledge, which is characterized by a complication of views and systems of scientific knowledge, where the main trends are differentiation and unification of knowledge.

At the moment, more and more new methods and approaches of scientific knowledge are emerging, which are used in the knowledge of political and legal processes and phenomena. These include such methods and approaches as: active-procedural, information-communicative, structural-functional, system-elemental, normative-institutional, cultural-historical, civilizational, integrative aspect, cybernetic, etc.

Meanwhile, despite the emergence of many new approaches, according to leading theorists (V. V. Lazarev, D. A. Kerimov, G. V. Maltsev,

V. S. Nersesyants, V. M. Syrykh, A. V. Polyakova, V. N. Protasova,

V. N. Sinyukova and others) methodological problems in the field of knowledge of law and legal reality are developed very poorly, and in some areas are even outdated and irrelevant.

We should agree with the indicated opinion of legal theorists regarding the intellectual inconsistency of legal science in the knowledge of law and legal reality within the framework of existing methodological directions, such as "legal positivism", "legal liberalism" and "natural-legal anthropocentrism", which are generally associated with materialistic ( deterministic) and idealistic understanding of the world. As a matter of fact, the scientific community has signed for its own failure and inability to offer the society an objective scientific paradigm of legal life.

Based on the foregoing, it seems necessary not only to identify, but also to theoretically generalize in science the accumulated experience in the knowledge of legal phenomena and existing developments in the field of methodology of legal knowledge, as well as to take a qualitatively new step in the development of a new methodology for explaining legal reality.

Legal reality is currently being modified under the influence of social processes, which manifests itself in the complication of the organization of its structure, and is reflected in the law itself, its branches, which requires a strictly scientific approach to its knowledge, the application of advanced principles and ideas of various methods of cognition. Hence, the theory and methodology of legal science is an attempt to construct the entire legal reality of modern society and build the entire categorical apparatus. This allows us to see not only the principle of integrity (according to Bertalanffy) of legal reality, but also the information interconnectedness and controllability of the legal existence of society.

Today in science there are many views on the methodology of legal science from the standpoint of various philosophical and theoretical schools. For example, from the point of view of a system-activity approach

(V. M. Gorshenev, V. N. Protasov, R. V. Shagieva and others), structural and functional (S. S. Alekseev, G. I. Muromtsev, N. I. Kartashov and others), information - communicative (R. O. Khalfina, A. V. Polyakov,

M. M. Rassolov and others), normative (M. I. Baitin, A. P. Glebov and others), cultural and historical (V. N. Sinyukov, A. P. Semitko); integrative (V. V. Lazarev, B. N. Malkov) and even civilizational.

The question of the very understanding of the methodology of jurisprudence in legal science is relevant. Opinions of theorists on this issue differ diametrically. This is partly due to the difference in understanding of the methodology and method of jurisprudence, as well as the tasks themselves, the object and subject of legal science. Perhaps the greatest differences in the understanding of the methodology of legal science are associated with ideas about the boundaries of methodological research in jurisprudence. Alone the authors limit the methodology of legal science to the study of research tools of jurisprudence, the application of a set of specific methods and means of scientific knowledge to the study of legal phenomena. Other complement the instrumental approach with the study of the very process of cognition of law, its philosophical and methodological foundations. Third they talk about the consideration of the epistemological features of jurisprudence, argue that “the analysis of legal knowledge at the level of philosophical methodology is insufficient and overly abstract to identify the specifics of legal (theoretical) knowledge. One way or another, theorists are inclined to believe that a different, more specific methodology is needed, dealing not with theory in general, but with that kind of theory that is observed in legal science. You can also notice the actual identification of the methodology of jurisprudence with the entire set of principles, means and methods of rational knowledge.

Unfortunately, all these circumstances do not allow lawyers to develop a single, objectively verified and coherent system of scientific methods of cognition, which, of course, does not contribute to the vigorous development of legal science and the solution of practical problems of jurisprudence. For instance, D. A. Kerimov considers that the methodology of law is nothing more than a general scientific phenomenon that combines the entire set of principles, means and methods of cognition (worldview, philosophical methods of cognition and teachings about them, general and particular scientific concepts and methods) developed by all social sciences, including including and a complex of legal sciences, and applied in the process of knowing the specifics of legal reality, its practical transformation; according to

V. N. Protasova the methodology (system of methods) of the theory of law and legal science as a whole is based on philosophy, the laws and categories of which are universal, universal and apply to all phenomena of the world around us, including law and the state; V. S. Nersesyants under the legal method he understands the path of legal knowledge - this is the path leading from object to subject, from primary (sensory, empirical) knowledge about law and the state to theoretical, scientific-legal (conceptual-legal) knowledge about these objects. The legal method as a way of cognition is an endless way of deepening and developing knowledge about law and the state, an ongoing movement from the already accumulated knowledge about these objects to its enrichment and development, from the empirical level of knowledge to the theoretical level, from the achieved level of theory to a higher level, from the already established concept of law to a new, theoretically more meaningful and rich concept; V. M. Syrykh believes that the methodology of law, being part of the theory of law or an independent scientific discipline, contains knowledge about:

• what techniques, methods of scientific knowledge should be used in the knowledge of the subject of the general theory of law;
• what methods, methods of cognition should be carried out this or that research procedure;
• what is the content of specific techniques, methods used for the knowledge of law, its laws;
• how methods are interconnected in the process of cognition, movement to new knowledge in the process of ascent from the concrete to the abstract and vice versa.

Such a diversity of ideas about the methodology of legal science is due to the versatility and complexity of not only the phenomenon of “methodology”, but also the very phenomenon of “law”, which is explored with the help of certain ways of thinking. The problems of the methodology of cognition of law require a thorough and constant research from a variety of directions in view of the conceptual importance of the means of cognizing legal reality: the result of cognition depends on which method of cognition. Famous Soviet theoretical physicist

L. Landau said that "the method is more important than the scientific discovery itself, because it allows you to make new discoveries."

The methodological problems of the theory of law and the state in their deepest (fundamental) basis are connected precisely with the problem of legal understanding - what is law as a phenomenon. Without resolving the issue of the methodology of cognition as a means of studying legal reality, it is impossible to approach the problem of legal understanding. And vice versa.

This circumstance, in turn, is due to the fact: what legal doctrine currently dominates in science, public consciousness and public policy - legal monism, when the state is recognized as the main source of the formation of law or legal pluralism, when society, its most diverse institutions create law on a par with the state, i.e. form the area of ​​manifestation of law and the boundaries of legal reality (of all legal phenomena) of the diverse legal life of people.

Legal methodology, by its nature, reflects real legal processes and phenomena, allowing one to penetrate into them through a system of concepts, forming the most complex and diverse categorical series of legal science. And such a view of legal methodology, which sees the whole world of diverse legal phenomena under the prism of a system of concepts that occupy their own place in legal science, is able to overcome the “torn” unsystematic approach to explaining the legal world.

Legal methodology as an integral part of the theoretical science of law deals with the development of methods of legal knowledge. Recent works in this area show that without a thorough study of the methods of scientific knowledge, there cannot be a full-fledged scientific explanation of law and legal reality as the most complex phenomena of reality. Meanwhile, until now, there are different views of jurists on these issues, arising from different worldview positions.

In the light of globalization, informatization, issues of bioethics, space research and the emergence of the Internet, the problem of changing the scientific paradigm and legal thinking is relevant. Such changes in legal reality require the development of the latest methods of cognition of these phenomena and the transition from the traditional theory of state and law (formal dogmatic) to modern objective science based on natural scientific understanding (G. V. Maltsev). All this suggests that the methodology of law, and in general the entire legal science, does not stand still, but tries to update the main processes of mental activity, reflecting them in the content of the science itself.

In this way, methodology of legal science is a general scientific phenomenon (for all legal sciences), covering the entire set (system) of principles, means and methods of cognition (worldview, philosophical methods of cognition and teachings about them, general and particular scientific concepts and methods) developed by all sciences, including and the system of legal sciences, and applied in the process of learning the specifics of state-legal reality, its improvement.

It is customary to subdivide the methods of legal science into four levels: philosophical(worldview), general scientific(for all sciences), private scientific(for some sciences) and special(for a separate science). These methods make it possible to understand state-legal phenomena and processes, their form, content, functions, essence and various manifestations.

For example, philosophical methods reflect people's views on the legal existence of a person and society in the context of jurisprudence, their place in the world, the value position of law and the state in the life of people, their meaning and purpose. They answer questions about how the legal world is arranged and what it consists of, what patterns underlie the functioning of law and the state, and how a person, society should use them in their activities. This level of methodology for jurisprudence implies a view of law and the state and their manifestations as one of the ways of activity in the vast and vast world of social, natural and informational connections in which they live and act, in an infinite variety of phenomena and processes of various orders. With a certain scientific development and approaches to deepening its knowledge, not so much new specific aspects of objects, their properties and essence are revealed, but their similarity and individuality are revealed, and a certain unity of the world and its power of influence on us through the general laws of its development are gradually realized. The study of law at this level, the general laws to which various social and natural processes are subject, answers the question of what is the unity and development of the world in the state-legal mirror of social relations, what are their sources and ultimate foundations as ways of life of society .

In relation to other sciences, philosophy as the science of the universal laws of the universe (the ultimate foundations of being) acts as their main and general method, as a kind of starting point and preparation for more detailed (general scientific and particular) knowledge. Legal science cognizes the world through the prism of a person, his legal way of being, as well as through the prism of social life and the state. IN real life with the help of the legal worldview and law, people comprehend and use the properties of surrounding objects, extracting their useful qualities in their life. Therefore, various methods of studying and processing the facts of empiricism are formed in scientific activity. And the more complex the object, the more relevant is the question of how it should be studied in order to correctly understand its essence and manifestations. It can be answered only by defining some general, deep laws and principles. However, the forms and methods of cognition are not important in and of themselves. They help people navigate the world around them, live and develop harmoniously, find a way out of various situations, etc. And, of course, understand how law and its forms of expression arise and develop, what are their properties and strength. This world is not only nature and the natural habitat of man and society. Man cannot live outside of any social community, whether it is a people or a state, out of ties with other people, out of ties with objects that he himself created, and out of ties with the surrounding world.

Therefore, the philosophical method is called upon to answer the question about the purpose of human existence by the legal way of activity, about its future development as a legal being, homouridicues. Does a person have free will in legal terms, and what are the limits of this will? Thus, through the ideological aspect of comprehension of reality, law and the state turn into one or another type of state-legal activity of the company, becoming a guideline and form of its evolution.

Knowledge about the most important regularities, properties of legal reality and legal consciousness acts from the side of philosophy in jurisprudence in the form of a system of general special legal and philosophicalcategories. These categories are the so-called paired categories of the highest methodological order: idea - law, principle - regularity, being - consciousness, matter - spirit, soul, movement - development, development - evolution, time - space, quality - quantity, essence - phenomenon, purpose - result, purpose - meaning.

In jurisprudence, these categories allow revealing state-legal processes and phenomena, expressed in legal structures and concepts, such as: form of law, form of state, source of law, essence of law, essence of the state, principles of law, principles of state activity, legal space, legal system , the mechanism of the state, etc.

Representatives of another philosophical direction - idealism associate the existence of the state and law either with objective reason (objective idealists), or with the consciousness of a person, his experiences, subjective and conscious aspirations (subjective idealists). Paying attention to the rejection of the dominance of the social over the spiritual, subjective idealists argue that it is not external social factors and conditions that determine the development of the state and law, but the internal spiritual principle, the worldview contained in the soul (consciousness) of a person. Among objective and subjective idealistic concepts, narrower directions have formed, such as pragmatism, phenomenologism, intuitionism and axiologism.

According to the main ideas pragmatism the concept of scientific truth is elusive, for everything that brings profit, success, is true. Whether ideas about the state and law correctly reflect social ties is revealed only when they are correlated with specific practical results. Intuitionism is based on the analysis of the integral problems of the state and law with the help of inspiration, insight. A legal scholar only in a state of mystical connection with the Higher Mind, God, can establish what the state and law are, what their meaning and purpose are. Axiological the method is an analysis of the state and law as specific values, with the help of which a social group or society as a whole regulates the corresponding behavior of people. Recently, the pragmatic approach has been used by supporters of the dialectical materialist method, but in a new liberal interpretation.

At the level general scientific knowledge traditional methods of cognition of reality are used: the system method, analysis and synthesis, induction and deduction, the method of historicism, functional, hermeneutic, synergistic, etc. They do not cover all scientific knowledge, like philosophical methods, but are applied only at its individual stages. They also include methods such as: fromsystemic, structural and functional, Germeneutic, synergetic.

General scientific methods determine only general approaches to solving the problems of legal science. Therefore, along with them, private scientific methods are used, which allow one to obtain specific knowledge on issues of state and law. These are the methods concrete sociological research, mathematical, cybernetic, comparative law, etc.

To the number special scientific methods should also include such methods that allow the development of new knowledge about law and the state (for example, the interpretation of legal texts and norms).

These methods are usually not used separately, but in various combinations. The choice of research methods is associated with various reasons. First of all, it is due to the nature of the problem under study, the object of study. For example, when studying the characteristics of a particular state that organizes social life in a given society, one can use a systemic or structural-functional method. This will allow the researcher to understand what underlies the life of a given society, which bodies manage it, in what areas, who manages it, etc.

The choice of methods is directly dependent on the worldview and theoretical position of the researcher. Thus, when studying the essence of the state and society, their development, a jurist-ideologist will most likely focus on the driving factors of their evolution, positive ideas of the creative activity of society, and a jurist-sociologist will analyze the effectiveness of the influence of certain ideas, norms and legal acts on the development of the state and public consciousness.

Recently, legal science has begun to turn its attention to other scientific achievements. We are talking about the fact that the interdisciplinary boundaries of scientific knowledge is a rather conditional thing, albeit an objective one. Legal science cooperates with many branches of knowledge. And in this regard, interaction with the technical sciences is especially important for her.

With intensive, "breakthrough" scientific, technical and informational development of society, there is a change in the legal life of people. Law, using information and communication technologies, becomes the so-called "virtual law" or "virtual space law", changing its form, source and content. As a result, new scientific knowledge in this area appears - legal cybernetics. In fact, law becomes “elusive” and “invisible”, a more subtle “informational” instrument for regulating social interaction, taking into account the psyche of people and the influence of information on it.

By by and large, law and the state are 50% psychology, i.e. behavior carried out on the basis of legal norms plus the implementation of power orders, which directly depends on the attitude towards these important institutions, through the perception of the necessary information.

Thus, the social significance of the methodology of legal science, in fact, as well as the science itself as a whole, its constituent parts, is due to the useful and significant result that they bring for people and their communities. Methodology, in fact, is a way of thinking of a person, society, which makes it possible to improve not only the very ideas about the world and legal processes and phenomena, but also to really improve social life based on the objective principles of being.

The understanding of the method of legal science as a set of rules, principles of knowledge that determine the rational path of movement towards reliable knowledge about the subject and object of legal science is not shared by all Russian jurists. In the domestic legal literature on this issue, various views are presented. According to some authors, the specific method of legal science can only be represented by its theoretical and conceptual apparatus, while general and special methods are only used by legal scientists, but are not developed by them. Other authors believe that the method of legal science consists of both rules, principles of knowledge, and its conceptual apparatus: concepts, categories, principles.

Attempts to include the conceptual apparatus of legal science in its method are untenable, because they do not correspond to the actual relationship between the theory and method of science. The method of the theory of state and law is a special component of legal science and has its own content, different from the theory of law. It consists only of rules, principles of knowledge. Categories and concepts, no doubt, act as an effective means of scientific knowledge, but in comparison with the method they perform a different theoretical function inherent only to them.

Categories and concepts are used at all stages, stages of scientific knowledge due to the fact that they reflect the essential aspects of political and legal phenomena and processes and thus equip the cognizing subject with reliable knowledge about the phenomena and processes under study. Relying on the conceptual apparatus of science, the researcher is freed from the obligation to re-study what is already in science as reliable knowledge, in particular, to identify the essence and form of the studied phenomena, their elements, connections, signs, functions. His attention should be focused on the study of those aspects, connections, regularities of the studied phenomena that have not been fully studied and knowledge about which is debatable and unreliable.

The conceptual apparatus of science finds wide and direct application in the course of research, in the process of obtaining, describing and explaining new phenomena, their aspects, connections, as well as in predicting trends in their further development. The acquired knowledge is reflected, fixed, mainly with the use of the existing conceptual apparatus of science. New categories, concepts are introduced into scientific circulation only in those cases when fundamentally new knowledge has been obtained that are not covered by the existing conceptual apparatus of science. In the same way, the explanation of new phenomena and processes identified during the study, their individual connections, signs is carried out using the available conceptual apparatus.

However, it should be taken into account that the use of categories and concepts in cognition, in the process of scientific research is carried out not arbitrarily, at the discretion of the researcher, but in accordance with the requirements of deductive inference, ascent from the concrete to the abstract, methods of explanation and forecasting. In a word, the application of theories and concepts to achieve new knowledge is a creative process that is subject to certain rules, and their observance is a mandatory requirement for obtaining objectively true knowledge. Any theoretical position, category, theory, if applied incorrectly, will not reveal new truths, but, on the contrary, will become a source of misconceptions and errors.

K. Marx's doctrine of the state and law did not contain even a hundredth of the mistakes made by his adherents in the person of Soviet legal scholars. Apology for the repressions of the 1930s-1950s, justification of the personality cult of I.V. Stalin, all voluntaristic decisions of the party on issues of state and law, interpretation of the essence of law in a positivist spirit as laws of the state acting in society, excessive ideologization of the general theory of state and law, a disdainful attitude towards the achievements of bourgeois lawyers and an uncritical attitude towards one's own, not always correct provisions - this is by no means a complete list of the "achievements" of Soviet jurisprudence. And all because Soviet lawyers failed not only to creatively develop the teachings of K. Marx, to cut off from him everything outdated and unacceptable in the new conditions, but also to correctly use the fundamental principles of this teaching in scientific analysis. Despite a number of attempts, the main method of scientific knowledge, the use of scientific theories in revealing the subject of the theory of state and law, was not mastered - the method of ascent from the abstract to the concrete.

The ability to operate with theoretical knowledge, categories and concepts of the theory of state and law is fixed in the rules, principles that make up the direct content of various general and special methods. But these rules and principles themselves are not formulated arbitrarily, but on the basis of and in accordance with the objective laws of the subject of research, reflected in the concepts and categories of science. And where the theoretical and conceptual apparatus is used as an objective basis for the methods of scientific knowledge, it realizes its methodological function.

The development of rules, principles of knowledge is carried out in the course of special studies. On the basis of the learned objective regularities about law and other legal phenomena, rules and principles of knowledge are formulated. An example of such rules is the principles of interpretation of law. It is not difficult to detect the conditionality of the requirements of the methods of interpretation of law by the provisions of the general theory of law on the legal norm, its structure and forms of expression in normative acts, and on the law-making process.

Thus, the rule that the definition of a term given in the general part of the code retains its significance for all the norms of a given branch is nothing more than a methodological expression of a well-known correlation between general and specific norms. In turn, the requirement, when interpreting the rules of law, to take into account the links between general, special and exclusive rules, protective and regulatory, blanket, reference rules is based on the methods used by the legislator to present the rules of law in normative legal acts.

On the basis of the learned patterns of functioning and development of the state and law, legal scholars develop a method of the theory of state and law. At the same time, they have to solve the following tasks: 1) determine the system of specific methods of cognition of law; 2) systematize methods, clarifying their epistemological nature and scope; 3) specify general and special techniques in accordance with the specifics of the subject of knowledge, develop private law methods.

Any method used in the theory of state and law contains requirements, rules that take into account the specifics of the state or law. So, in the comparative legal method, the general principles of comparison receive a concretized expression. Based on the theoretical provisions on law as a normative regulator of social relations, legal scholars develop specific criteria for the object and basis of comparison, and also determine the phenomena and their features that can act as an object or basis for comparison.

The development of general and special methods in relation to the specifics of political and legal matter is a necessary condition for their successful use in the theory of state and law and other legal sciences. The general theory of statistics, for example, currently has a fairly developed system of techniques for studying the quantitative aspect of social phenomena. However, all these methods are still timidly used in jurisprudence, since methodological issues related to their adaptation to the knowledge of the specific laws of the state and law remain unresolved. Overcoming methodological problems that impede the widespread use of statistical methods in jurisprudence is the primary task of legal scholars. It is they who know the specifics of law, its laws and, therefore, determine the specific areas and limits of the use of statistical tools in legal research, and also formulate specific rules for the statistical analysis of legal phenomena.

For similar reasons, in jurisprudence, methods of mathematical modeling, experiment, which have received a fairly deep development in philosophical literature, are not widely used.

In this way, the conceptual apparatus of science in cognition performs two functions: theoretical and methodological. Concepts realize a theoretical function if they are used to describe, explain and predict legal or political phenomena. When categories and concepts act as the basis of methodological rules, principles, they realize the methodological function. But in this case, the result of cognition is not new knowledge about the state or law, their laws, but rules, principles of cognition, which are not in the very subject of research and concepts reflecting it. It is these rules, principles in the aggregate that constitute the content of such a component of the theory of state and law as a method.

To interpret categories and concepts as a special or the only method of the theory of state and law on the grounds that they reflect the essential, natural aspects of legal phenomena means to present the theoretical function of concepts and categories as a methodological one. In practice, this would turn any theoretical study into a methodological one, and the method of the theory of state and law would be reduced to a logical-epistemological analysis of categories and concepts. Ultimately, this approach creates real danger identification of methodological problems of jurisprudence with theoretical ones and substitution of the former by the latter.

As a relatively independent component of the theory of state and law, the method has its own content - a certain set, a system of rules, principles of cognition, which are based on the known objective patterns and guide the researcher to obtain new objectively true knowledge.

The rules, principles of cognition, applied at any one stage of scientific cognition or for solving one cognitive task, together form a separate specific method. So, the rules used in the process of interpreting the rules of law, in their system form a method of interpreting the rules of law, the rules governing the process of obtaining general knowledge from single facts, - induction.

The methodological arsenal of the theory of state and law is quite complex. It includes methods of various degrees of generality and cognitive tasks, including:

• 1) general philosophical method. Its universality is expressed in the fact that this method is used in all specific sciences and at all stages, stages of scientific knowledge;
• 2) common methods - analysis, synthesis, abstraction, system-structural approach, ascent from the abstract to the concrete, which, like the philosophical method, are used in all specific sciences, but the scope of which is limited to solving certain cognitive problems;
• 3) special methods of legal science. They are made up of methods, techniques that were originally developed by representatives of non-legal sciences, and then used by lawyers to understand political and legal phenomena. These are statistical, concrete sociological, psychological, mathematical methods;
• 4) private methods of legal science. They were developed by lawyers for the knowledge of political and legal phenomena and can only be applied within the limits of legal science. These include methods of interpretation of law, comparative legal method and some others.

The formation of the methodology of legal science is historically conditioned by the development of the practical activities of society, the accumulation of experience of legal life in various spheres of life and, as a result, the development of public consciousness, its legal way of thinking. The history of ideas about law, its comprehension, interpretation and knowledge has gone approximately the same way as the history of science as a system of knowledge as a whole. As a rule, the following stages are distinguished in it: philosophical-practical, theoretical-empirical and reflective-practical. The first period covers the legal thought of antiquity, the Middle Ages and a significant part of the New Age, while the second and third periods mainly fall at the end of the 18th and 20th centuries.

In general, the evolutionary (gradual) development of law, the improvement of legal activity, law-making and legal technique, and at the same time a critical understanding of the created and functioning law was marked by the emergence of a special type of social activity - scientific and doctrinal, aimed at understanding the general laws of legal life and the evolution of law . This circumstance, in turn, gave a direct impetus to the emergence of the foundations of the methodology of legal science as a section of legal knowledge that deals with the development and application of certain methods of studying law and legal reality.

The method is traditionally understood as the path to the goal, the road to knowledge. In relation to knowledge, it is used in the sense of "the path to knowledge", "the path to the truth." The concept of "method" is defined as a way of action, a type of techniques and operations that guide cognition. This method always reflects the properties of the object and the subjective capabilities of the researcher.

To solve scientific problems, many methods are used that can be classified in different ways. The most common basis for classification is the degree of generality. In legal science, it is also customary to subdivide methods into four levels: philosophical (ideological), general scientific (for all sciences), particular scientific (for some sciences) and special (for individual sciences).

Formal-logical and general scientific methods of scientific knowledge are of particular importance for legal science.

Among the general logical methods of cognition, methods of formal logic are distinguished:

• analysis is a method of mentally dividing the object under study into certain elements with the aim of in-depth and consistent knowledge of them and the connections between them;
• synthesis is a method of mentally recreating the whole on the basis of the known parts and their relationships;
• abstraction is a mental separation of individual elements, properties, relations of an object and their consideration in isolation both from the object as a whole and from its other parts;
• concretization - correlation of abstract representations and concepts with reality;
• deduction is a reliable conclusion from knowledge of a greater degree of generality to knowledge of a lesser degree of generality;
• induction is a probabilistic conclusion from knowledge of a lesser degree of generality to new knowledge of a greater degree of generality;
• analogy - the conclusion about the belonging of a certain feature to the subject under study based on the similarity in essential features with another subject;
• modeling is a method of indirect knowledge of an object with the help of its model.

General scientific methods are those techniques and operations that have been developed by the efforts of all or large groups of sciences and that are used to solve common cognitive problems. These methods are divided into methods-approaches and methods-techniques. The first group includes substrate (content), structural, functional and system approaches. These approaches guide the researcher to the appropriate aspect of the study of the object under study.

It is with the help of this group of methods that the main process of scientific cognitive activity is carried out - this is the study of the properties and qualities of the studied object of knowledge.

At the level of general scientific knowledge, traditional methods of cognition of reality are also used: the system method, analysis and synthesis, induction and deduction, the method of historicism, functional, hermeneutic, synergetic, etc. They do not cover all scientific knowledge, like philosophical methods, but are applied only to its individual stages.

In this group, methods are divided into empirical and theoretical. The universal empirical method is observation, which is understood as purposeful sensory perception facts of reality. This method is characterized by relative limitation and passivity. These shortcomings are overcome by applying another empirical method. An experiment is a method in which, at the will of the researcher, both the object of knowledge and the conditions for its functioning are formed. This method allows you to reproduce the processes the necessary number of times.

According to the historical method of cognition, the state and law must be approached as social reality changing in time and space. If, for example, in Marxism, when explaining the reasons for the development of society and the state, law, priority is given to the economy (basis), then in idealism - ideas, consciousness and worldview.

The system method is the study of the state and law, as well as individual state-legal phenomena from the standpoint of their existence as integral systems consisting of interacting elements. Most often, the state is considered as a set of such components as the people, power and territory, and law - as a system of law, consisting of spheres, industries, institutions and rules of law.

The structural-functional method is closely related to the system method, which consists in the knowledge of the functions of the state and law, their constituent elements (functions of the state, functions of law, functions of legal responsibility, etc.).

In legal science, there are a number of provisions, categories, structures and trends (scientific schools) that are dogma, that is, generally accepted and recognized by all lawyers and jurists. For example, such concepts and legal constructions as the system of law, the rule of law, the system of legislation, the form of law, the source of law, the operation of law, the form of implementation of law, the mechanism of legal regulation, law in the objective sense, law in the subjective sense, legal relationship, subjective legal rights and responsibilities, etc., are generally accepted and are interpreted for everyone in basically the same way.

Legal dogmatic (formal dogmatic) approachallows us to consider law as a sociocultural phenomenon and understand it as a system of fundamental legal institutions, rules and structures, means and methods of legal regulation, forms and concepts of legal activity, etc., formed in the process historical development rights and embodied in specific legal systems that are established by the state.

The hermeneutic method used in the legal sciences proceeds from the fact that law, legal acts, the rule of law are phenomena of a special worldview. Therefore, they need to interpret their "life integrity" on the basis of a person's "internal experience", his direct perception and intuition. Any epoch can be understood only from the point of view of its own logic. For a lawyer to understand the meaning of a law that was in force in the distant past, it is not enough to know its text. He must understand what content was invested in the relevant concepts in that era.

The synergetic method is a view of phenomena as self-organizing systems. Out of the creative potential of chaos, a new reality emerges, a new order. In legal science, synergetics considers the state and law as random and non-linear, i.e., concrete historical and variable social phenomena. The state and law are constantly changing, as they are caused by many different reasons, factors and options for possible events.

General scientific methods determine only general approaches to solving the problems of legal science. Therefore, along with them, private scientific methods are used, which allow one to obtain specific knowledge on issues of state and law. These are methods of concrete sociological research, mathematical, cybernetic, comparative legal, etc.

The method of specific sociological research involves the collection, analysis and processing of legal information (official documents, practice materials law enforcement, survey materials, surveys and interviews). It is aimed at establishing the social conditionality of law and legal norms, identifying the need for law in society and the effectiveness of legal regulation.

The mathematical method is based on the analysis of quantitative indicators that reflect the state and dynamics of changes in a particular socio-legal phenomenon (for example, the level of crime, public awareness of the main regulatory legal acts

etc.). It includes the observation of social and legal phenomena, quantitative data processing, their analysis and is used in the process of studying phenomena characterized by mass character, repetition and scale.

The modeling method is the mental creation of models of state-legal phenomena and their manipulation in the expected conditions. This method is aimed at finding the best solutions to specific problems.

The method of socio-legal experiment is to create an experiment using legal and state phenomena. For example, the introduction of the institution of trial by jury, legal acts or individual legal norms and verification of their operation in specific, real social conditions.

The cybernetic method is a method associated with the use of concepts (“input-output”, “information”, “control”, “feedback”) and technical means of electronics and computer technology. This method is used for automated processing, storage, search and transmission of legal information.

Special methods allow to detail knowledge about legal and state phenomena. The number of special scientific methods should also include such methods that allow the development of new knowledge about law and the state (for example, the interpretation of legal texts and norms). The methodology of interpretation is a separate area of ​​legal knowledge and is understood as the doctrine of interpretation or, as they sometimes say, hermeneutics.

Hermeneutics (from the Greek. hermeneutikos- explaining, interpreting) - the art of interpreting texts (classical antiquity, religious monuments, etc.), the doctrine of the principles of their interpretation.

Legal science in its continuous development is in constant interaction with various branches of the humanities. Modern legal hermeneutics as a direction of modern jurisprudence is actively developing issues of interpretation, problems of the theory of the language of law, including in connection with the fundamental problems of understanding the meaning of legal texts. She explores the practice of interpreting various legal meanings contained in official written documents and oral speech, in signs and symbols, in the judgments of lawyers about legal situations. It should be noted that the hermeneutic approach to the study and interpretation of law-significant texts is a legal direction in the field of humanitarian knowledge.

Until recently, legal research, as a rule, was limited to formal-logical operations designed to produce the most in-depth analysis of legal material for its practical use in the process of implementing a particular law. The justification for this approach was the general belief in the original purpose of jurisprudence to meet the requirements of legal practice and the process of training and professional development of legal professionals.

For many centuries, numerous attempts have been made to interpret legal texts that have a sign-symbolic nature. The need to interpret these texts is caused by the following reasons:

• the ambiguity of legal monuments and texts, depending on the obsolete words contained in the law and the archaic text, or on the fact that the expression used by the law grammatically equally allows two different interpretations;
• specificity in the presentation of legal texts (doubts in understanding the law sometimes arise from the fact that the legislator, when presenting the law, instead of the general principle, puts forward individual, specific objects of the law);
• the uncertainty of the law (sometimes doubts arise due to the use of general, insufficiently defined expressions by the legislator); uncertainty of quantitative relations in the law;
• contradictions between different texts of the law;
• interpretive fences around the law;
• changes in living conditions (the main motive that prompted the teachers of the law to interpret the text, moreover, quite often in contradiction with its direct, literal meaning, were changes in the cultural structure of people's life, as well as changes that occurred in the ethical views of the people on the personality of a person, etc. ).

The purpose of modern legal hermeneutics is, after all, in the search for and implementation of the meaning of the legal text, the study of the problems of the plurality of meanings and interpretation. In modern conditions, the form of law cannot act otherwise than as a sign form, the source and embodiment of which is the language. Legal regulation and its elements act as ideal objects, an external form of expression of public consciousness, which is subject to understanding and application.

These methods are usually not used separately, but in various combinations. The choice of research methods is associated with various reasons. First of all, it is due to the nature of the problem under study, the object of study. For example, when studying the characteristics of a particular state that organizes social life in a given society, one can use a systemic or structural-functional method. This will allow the researcher to understand what underlies the life of a given society, which bodies manage it, in what areas, who manages it, etc.

The choice of methods is directly dependent on the worldview and theoretical position of the researcher. Thus, a jurist-ideologist, when studying the essence of the state and society, their development, most likely, will focus on the driving factors of their evolution, positive ideas of the creative activity of society, and a jurist-sociologist will analyze the effectiveness of the influence of certain ideas, norms and legal acts on the development of the state and public consciousness.

§ 2. Dialectical principles of scientific knowledge in jurisprudence

In science, there are several theories describing the development of various systems. Dialectics is considered the most applicable to various changes in the surrounding world. In ancient Greece, this concept meant a dispute, a clash of opposing views, a contradiction. Later, this concept began to designate the contradictory nature of relations not only in controversy, but throughout nature, as well as in social (legal) development. A holistic dialectical concept of development was developed by the German philosopher of the 19th century. G. Hegel. At present, dialectics means the theory of the development of consciousness (thinking), which is based on the contradictory nature of all kinds of changes. This direction of philosophical knowledge is called objective idealism.

The content of scientific theories is its principles and laws. Principles are the fundamental ideas that determine the practical or spiritual activity of a person, for example, in the construction of some kind of knowledge system (theory). For dialectics, such fundamental ideas are the principle of universal connection and the principle of development in all forms of being. The first principle implies that any object of our world, directly or through other objects, is connected with all objects. For example, each person is connected to the planet Earth. Our planet is connected to the Sun. The solar system is connected by physical dependencies with other systems of our Galaxy, which, in turn, with other Galaxies. If we graphically depict this situation in the form of points (objects) connected by lines (connections), we will see that each person is connected with all space objects, i.e. with the entire Universe. Another thing is that these dependencies can be almost imperceptible. In a similar way, you can trace the chains of connections of all objects on Earth. The meaning of the second principle has been discussed above.

The concept of "law" is of particular importance. Many people, especially those who study law, apply this concept too narrowly, forgetting that there are other laws besides legal ones.

The concept of "law" denotes a special kind of relationship. This is an essential, stable, necessary connection between objects.

Connections between various phenomena in nature are objective. Regardless of whether or not a person knows about them, understands or does not understand the essence of events, these connections are realized under the appropriate conditions. Such stable and necessary connections are called the laws of reality.

If a person, by the power of his mind, penetrates into the essence of ongoing processes, if he manages to discover the causes of certain events, the conditions for the implementation of certain connections, then this knowledge is formulated as the laws of science. This is a subjective description of natural connections by a person. It is quite obvious that the laws of science describe natural relationships approximately, because a person does not know everything. Only in exceptional cases do the laws of science exactly correspond to the laws of nature. Therefore, people often fail when they rely too much on their knowledge, even if they consider it scientific.

In order for a society to maintain at least some order, it is necessary to establish rules for relations and connections between people. It is very difficult, if not impossible, to find, to define connections that would satisfy all people. Therefore, legislative bodies develop generalized rules of conduct that regulate diverse social relations in various spheres of life. In this sense, juridical laws are the connections prescribed to people with other objects.

In the following presentation, the philosophical meaning of the concept of "law" is implied, which refers to all forms of being, and not just to legal relations. In dialectics, as a theory of development, three laws are formulated: “the law of unity and struggle of opposites”, “the law of mutual transition of quantitative and qualitative changes”, “the law of negation of negation”.

The first law: unity and struggle of opposites.

Its formula is as follows: in the essence of every thing there are opposite sides (properties) that are in a state of unity and struggle; the struggle of opposites leads to an ever sharper contradiction and ends with the disappearance of the old and the emergence of a new state of things.

The most important concepts of the law: identity - sameness, coincidence, equality; difference - dissimilarity, discrepancy, inequality; opposite is the extreme degree of difference. According to this law, the source of change and development of any object is in itself. This is true for all cases where there is no interference from an external force. This law proposes to perceive any object as a complex formation that contains elements that are not directly compatible with each other.

The unity of opposites is as follows:

• they are inextricably linked (for example, single and common features of an object;
• there are no unique objects, each is somewhat similar to the others;
• there are also no standard objects in the full sense, each one is somewhat different from the others);
• they mutually determine each other (the individual can be distinguished only against the background of the general and vice versa);
• they mutually pass, mutually transform into each other (what in one respect acts as a single feature, for example, a person who knows criminal law in the mass of bus passengers, in another respect is a common feature - the same person among the employees of the prosecutor's office).

The struggle of opposites consists in the fact that they oppose each other, strive to exclude (destroy) each other, for example, knowledge and ignorance of an individual - something is remembered, but something is forgotten. Contradiction is the culmination of the struggle of opposites. Leaving this boiling point, the end of the struggle is development. For example, a student will have an exam (test, survey, etc.). He is worried about a contradictory situation: on the one hand, the exam must be passed without fail, on the other hand, there is no (or little) knowledge. This contradiction can be resolved in two ways:

• learned the material and the student is already a different person, smarter, that is, he has developed towards perfection in this field of knowledge;
• decided to give up knowledge, and from the exam, and from the educational institution - he also became a different person, had already got rid of the desire for excellence in this area, that is, he had developed towards degradation on this life path.

Thus, through the connection (struggle) of opposing forces, properties, dependencies, all objects of the world develop, including social systems, a person and his spirituality. It is necessary to understand that for a person, contradictions with himself and the people around him are not a disease, but a natural state. Civilized relations in society imply attentiveness to these contradictions, predicting their consequences, and the ability to manage oneself.

The second law: the mutual transition of quantitative and qualitative changes.

Its formula is as follows: the development of a thing occurs through quantitative changes, which, accumulating, exceed a certain critical measure and cause qualitative changes, and these, in turn, give rise to new possibilities for quantitative changes.

The main concepts and characteristics of this law are as follows:

The initial concept of this law is the concept of "property". This concept denotes the presence and nature of the variability of an object, which manifests itself in relations with other objects. Properties show the similarity or difference of objects. Any object has many different properties:

• quality - a set of basic properties of an object, which determines its state of identical compatibility with itself. Thanks to a set of these properties, a thing exists as such and differs from others. With the loss of at least one of these properties, the thing ceases to be itself, loses its original certainty and acquires a different status. For example, the red flag - a symbol of the communists, faded, became white - a symbol of surrender;
• quantity is the amount of change in the object. Often, but not always, this volume can be expressed numerically. For example: assessment of student knowledge;
• a measure is a boundary at the transition of which quantitative changes cause qualitative changes. Within the bounds of the measure, quality remains the same, but quantity varies. For example, ice - (0 o C) water (100 o C) - steam.
• the transition from one quality to another is called a "jump".

Thus, through the connection of quantitative and qualitative changes, the development of all objects of the world takes place. If people want to achieve qualitative changes in the social structure, technology or the formation of their own properties, then there is no other way than the corresponding quantitative changes, that is, a gradual change in the culture of society, the accumulation of scientific knowledge, personal training and hard work. And in order to achieve high quantitative indicators in any sphere of society, you must first reach a certain qualitative level of development. For example, if you want to run fast, learn to walk first; if you want to accumulate scientific knowledge, first learn to read and write. Development is an exit to a new qualitative level, otherwise it is not development, but simply a quantitative change in the properties of an object.

Third law: negation of negation.

Its formula is as follows: development occurs through the dialectical negation of the old state of the object by the new, the new by the latest, as a result of which development combines a successive and cyclical character.

The category "negation" expresses a certain type of change in the state of an object. Any object, developing, inevitably reaches the stage of negation, i.e. becomes qualitatively different. Complete negation is a change of quality to a contradictory one. The chain of negation of the old and the emergence of the new has neither beginning nor end. Negation can act as a simple destruction of the object. Then there is no need to talk about development.

Dialectical negation involves the destruction of only part of the properties of the object, which are no longer needed or even harmful. At the same time, other properties are preserved, those that determine the existence of the system at the present time, and fundamentally new properties appear, which ultimately determines the qualitative leap.

Double complete negation (negation of negation) is a situation of “supposedly returning” to the old: every phenomenon turns into its own negation, but then again there is a negation; as a result, the third phase bears a formal resemblance to the first. If there is no development, then the change goes in a circle. If there is a development to a similar state, the object returns at a different level. Therefore, dialectical development is spoken of as a movement in a spiral.

Thus, this law demonstrates the connection between the old and the new in development, their struggle and mutual transformation. Every emerging new sooner or later becomes old and disappears. People, if they are interested in the development of any systems, including themselves, cannot escape from the rejection (negation) of some old properties, connections, states and the acquisition of directly opposite, new properties, connections, states. The old is collapsing elements and connections, they entail the destruction of the entire system, reducing its functionality. What is new is improving elements and connections, they improve the system as a whole, increase its functionality.

The laws of dialectical development are specific and are not reducible to each other, but they are not separated by an impenetrable wall. They are interconnected, complement each other in the description of development. Development is the resolution of contradictions, it is also a change in the qualitative state, it is also the dialectical negation of the old by the new.

Let us consider the manifestation of these laws as a change in the stages of development of the political and legal sphere of society.

The state-legal sphere is a set of relations between social subjects, which are designed to provide them with collective stability and manageability based on law as a social regulator of behavior. In a primitive society, stability and manageability were ensured by collective power control over the observance of customs and traditions, prescriptions and taboos (prohibitions based on fear of the retribution of some deity). At the next stage, the function of ensuring integrity is assigned to the permanent rulers (leaders). The next step in the development of the political sphere is the emergence of the state as a special organization that ensures the security of society and law as an officially established system of relationships, the violation of which entails compulsory punishment by the state. A dialectical return to collective participation in ensuring the unity and viability of society is the development of civil society organizations seeking to participate in the management of social processes. These include institutions of culture, science, political parties, corporations, etc.

Rationality(from Latin ratio - mind) - in a general sense, it is explained as a relatively stable set of rules, norms, standards, standards of spiritual and material activity, as well as values ​​generally accepted and unambiguously understood by all members of this community. In broad philosophical terms, the problem of rationality involves the analysis of the dialectic rational And reasonable.

A prerequisite for scientific rationality is the fact that science masters the world in terms. Scientific and theoretical thinking is primarily characterized as a conceptual activity, while, for example, in art, the main form of mastering the world is an artistic image. It is the operation of concepts that allows science to perform the main cognitive functions: description, explanation and prediction of the phenomena of a certain subject area. And that is why each science has its own language, its own subject area of ​​research and its own method. "The most valuable discoveries are made last of all; the most valuable discoveries are methods," wrote F. Nietzsche. "Great methodologists: Aristotle, Bacon, Descartes, Auguste Comte.

In terms of rationality, scientific knowledge is characterized by two more features - evidence and consistency. These qualities distinguish scientific knowledge from ordinary knowledge. The basis of consistency and evidence is the logical interdependence of scientific concepts and judgments. "The image in which the scientific community likes to present itself, and which in fact serves as the image in which most of us perceive this community, is the image of rationality par excellence. The scientific community behaves as the very paradigm of institutionalized rationality. It is presented in as owning something significant, namely, the scientific method that generates the "logic of justification" (justification). In other words, this method provides methods for objectively evaluating the dignity of scientific theories, "- such a point of view on scientific rationality and the scientific method is shared by W. Newton -Smith.

The ideal of scientificity is a system of cognitive values ​​and norms, the choice, status and interpretation of which depend on a broad cognitive and sociocultural context. It is important, however, to emphasize that the sociocultural component does not find its direct and immediate expression in the content of the ideal of scientificity.

These fundamentals are closely intertwined with the intellectual tradition that was formed back in antiquity, and therefore for a long time they had the character of some evidence, the alternative to which for the most part was not only not formulated, but was not even realized. The ideal of scientificity is a system of cognitive values ​​and norms, the choice, status and interpretation of which depend on a broad cognitive and sociocultural context.

The ideal of science in the natural sciences of the XVII-XVIII centuries. an infallible belief in the reliable truth of scientific laws and the special reliability of scientific research methods was considered .. Everything changed after the revolution in "natural science" that arose at the end of the "XIX" - the beginning of the "XX" "centuries, when natural radioactivity was discovered elements, thanks to which it was found that atoms are not the last, indivisible particles of matter, energy quanta were discovered, views on space and time were significantly revised, etc.

All these discoveries testified to the fact that scientific laws, which were considered irrefutable truths in classical science, are relative. Therefore, the former ideal of scientificity was questioned, criticized and revised, on the basis of which a non-classical ideal of scientificity arose, taking into account the relative nature of scientific truths, their dependence on the level of development of practice and culture of their time.

The non-classical ideal of scientificity is characterized, according to some researchers, by such essential features as anti-fundamentalism, pragmatic efficiency, externalism and pluralism. According to externalism, the functioning and development of scientific knowledge is determined, among other things, by social and cultural conditions external to it.

In the 20th century, civilization faced global problems generated by scientific and technological development. It became obvious that science not only studies the development of the world, but is itself a factor and result of its evolution. If at the first stage the value of scientific knowledge was seen in the fact that it is a means of salvation, and at the second stage it was contained in economic efficiency, now science is the main means of preserving civilization. In this regard, in the last third of the 20th century, new radical changes take place in the foundations of scientific knowledge, during which post-non-classical science is being formed.

Basic principles:

The paradigm of integrity is affirmed, according to which the universe, biosphere, noosphere, society, man, etc. represent a single entity. The desire to build a general scientific picture of the world based on the principle of universal evolutionism (the theory of a non-stationary Universe; synergetics; the theory of biological evolution and the concepts of the biosphere and noosphere developed on its basis).

The paradigm theory is synergetics - the theory of self-organization that studies the behavior of open non-equilibrium systems.

The objects of analysis are complex systems characterized by openness and historical self-development.

The orientation of modern science to the study of complex historically developing systems significantly restructures the norms of research activity. Methods for constructing possible scenarios, historical reconstruction, etc. are applied.

Science includes such concepts as uncertainty, stochasticity, chaos, bifurcation, dissipative structures, etc., expressing non-equilibrium characteristics of reality.

There is a convergence of natural and social sciences, in which the ideas and principles of modern natural science are increasingly being introduced into the humanities, and the reverse process is also taking place. And the center of this merging, rapprochement is a person. An attempt to connect the objective world and the human world.

Some achievements: gene technologies are developing, microbiology - cloning; calc. technology - microprocessors, the creation of artificial neural networks, on the basis of which neurocomputers are developed and created, microelectronics and nanoelectronics. Increasingly, the objects of research are complex, unique, historically developing systems that are characterized by openness and self-development.

The formation of post-non-classical science does not lead to the destruction of the methods and cognitive attitudes of classical and non-classical research. Post-nonclassical science will only more clearly define the scope of their application.

Method tgp is a special component of legal science and has its own content, different from the theory of law. It consists only of rules, principles of knowledge. These rules and principles are not formulated arbitrarily, but on the basis of and in accordance with the objective laws of the subject of research, reflected in the concepts and categories of science. Any method used in the theory of state and law contains requirements, rules that take into account the specifics of the state or law. So, in the comparative legal method, the general principles of comparison receive a concretized expression.

The subject of knowledge determines the methods of research.

The theoretical-conceptual apparatus can be used as an objective basis for the methods of scientific knowledge, then it realizes its methodological function.

The rules, principles of cognition, applied at any one stage of scientific cognition or for solving one cognitive task, together form a separate specific method. So, the rules used in the process of interpreting the rules of law, in their system form a method of interpreting the rules of law, the rules governing the process of obtaining general knowledge from single facts - induction.

Classification of methods by Raw:

1) universal philosophical method. Its universality is expressed in the fact that this method is used in all specific sciences and at all stages, stages of scientific knowledge;

2) common methods- analysis, synthesis, abstraction, system-structural approach, ascent from the abstract to the concrete, which, like the philosophical method, are used in all specific sciences, but the scope of which is limited to solving certain cognitive problems;

3) special methods of legal science. They are made up of methods, techniques that were originally developed by representatives of non-legal sciences, and then used by lawyers to understand political and legal phenomena. These are statistical, concrete sociological, psychological, mathematical methods;

4) private methods of legal science. They were developed by lawyers for the knowledge of political and legal phenomena and can only be applied within the limits of legal science. These include methods of interpretation of law, comparative legal method and some others.

Common classification of methods:

1. Universal - the method of dialectical materialism is used in all sciences, at any stages, stages of scientific research. He proceeds from the fundamental ideas that the world as a whole, including the state and law, is material, exists outside and independently of the will and consciousness of people, i.e. objectively, that the surrounding reality, the laws of its development are accessible to human knowledge, that the content of our knowledge is objectively predetermined by the existence of a real, independent of people's consciousness of the surrounding world.

2. General scientific - these are those that are used in all or many branches of science and apply to all sides, sections of the relevant science. Among them, the following methods are usually distinguished: logical, historical, system-structural, comparative, methods of specific sociological research.

3. Special = specific = private scientific. - are characteristic of specific branches of scientific knowledge, with the help of them it is possible to achieve a certain deepening of knowledge of state-legal phenomena. They enrich the general and general scientific methods, concretizing them in relation to the peculiarities of the study of political and legal reality.

Method- a set of techniques, methods by which this subject is investigated.

Methodology legal science is the doctrine of how, in what ways and means, with the help of what philosophical principles it is necessary to study state-legal phenomena, this is a conditional philosophical outlook a system of theoretical principles, logical techniques and special research methods that are used to obtain new knowledge that objectively reflects the state-legal reality.

1. There is a point of view (D.A. Kerimov) that methodology is an integral phenomenon that combines a number of components: worldview and fundamental general theoretical concepts, universal philosophical laws and categories, general and particular scientific methods, i.e. not only a system of methods but also a doctrine about them. Therefore, it cannot be reduced only to the doctrine of methods. In addition, the methodology is not reduced only to its constituent components, it has its own patterns of development - the components of the methodology interact with each other, and therefore acquire properties that are different from their single existence: general theoretical concepts permeate the worldview, universal philosopher laws and categories illuminate the boundaries of applicability general and private scientific research methods. The ratio of method and methodology - as a dialectical ratio of the whole and the part, the system and the element.

Methodology is not an independent science, it only "serves" other sciences.

2. V.P. Kazimirchuk interprets the methodology of legal science as the application of a system of logical techniques and special methods for studying legal phenomena determined by the principles of materialistic dialectics.

3. From the point of view of A.D. Gorbuzy, I.Ya. Kozachenko and E.A. Sukharev, the methodology of legal science is a scientific knowledge (research) of the essence of state and law based on the principles of materialism, adequately reflecting their dialectical development.

The main methodological traditions in the history of legal science. Change of paradigms

Methodology in the science of law, its formation and historical development had a number of significant features. Since its inception in the XII century. and up to the XVI-XVII centuries. the methods of formal logic were predominantly used, and the law was practically not involved in the development of its own methods of cognition. Since the 17th century the attention of scientists is beginning to attract the methods of philosophical understanding of law, which leads to the formation of such a direction of legal thought as the philosophical methodology of knowledge. In the 19th century with the advent of scientific (theoretical) jurisprudence, methodological studies acquire fundamental importance in the knowledge of law, and in the 20th century. they begin to take shape as an independent area of ​​law.

In the 70-80s of the XX century. sociological and statistical methods began to be actively used. In general, means of knowledge that do not have a philosophical status, but are applicable in most areas of science. In the XX century. In connection with the emergence of the so-called metascientific spheres of knowledge in the methodology of law, new research tools began to be allocated. They are the principles, forms and procedures of research used by all or at least most of the modern sciences.

When referring to these research tools, the theory of state and law ensures its compliance with the current level of development of scientific knowledge. Modern science, in general, is characterized by a high degree of integration, and interscientific perception of the results and methods of research is one of the mechanisms for its development, attracting the most research common funds and methods of other sciences - a necessary condition for the progress of any science, including jurisprudence.

Recently, a little-known method of alternatives has been developed. The method of alternatives is the solution of scientific problems by comparing and criticizing opposing theories. As applied to law, the method of alternatives is the identification of contradictions between various hypotheses about state-legal phenomena. The origins of this method in the most general form are in the philosophy of Socrates: the method of disclosing contradictions was called "maieutics" (assistance in the birth of a new one). Socrates saw the task in encouraging his interlocutors to find the truth through a dispute, criticizing the interlocutor and putting forward his hypothesis of the issue under discussion. During the discussion, all answers were recognized as incorrect and rejected one after another, new answers were put forward instead of them, which, in turn, were also recognized as incorrect, etc. Socrates believed that truth could be found by the method of maieutics.

The developer of this method is considered to be Karl Popper (1902-1994), a British philosopher, logician and sociologist, one of the greatest thinkers of the 20th century. In 1972, his book “Objective Knowledge” was published, where K. Popper reveals the essence of the method of alternatives: it is always important to find alternatives in the knowledge of an object to existing hypotheses about it, and then, subjecting them to criticism and thereby pushing alternatives together, to identify new knowledge about the object. “The theory is criticized from many different angles, and criticism allows you to identify those points of the theory that may be vulnerable,” he says.

A number of researchers, in particular, R.Kh. Makuev proposed the method of model systems (images). He believes that this method is productive not only in law enforcement, but also in the study of social and exact sciences. The method of model systems (images) assumes that “logical scientific constructions arise on the basis of virtual (ideal) images in the mental process, which are then photographed by the subconscious, and instantly the final virtual system of models (images) is addressed to the memory, in which it is stored (conserved) until as long as it is not demanded by some social signal (the need for written or electronic reproduction, the exchange of oral information, practical activities, etc.)”.

Modern law, which has extensive methodological tools, cannot pass by those theoretical developments that appeared due to such a relatively new one that developed in the second half of the 20th century. scientific direction as synergetics. Born in the depths of natural science, synergetics soon came to the attention of representatives of various sciences, including philosophy, sociology, political science, and law.

Synergetics was formed as an independent scientific direction in the second half of the 20th century. The term synergetics in Greek means "joint action". Introducing it, Hermann Haken put two meanings into it. The first is the theory of the emergence of new properties in a whole consisting of interacting objects. The second is an approach that requires the cooperation of specialists from different fields for its development.

The ideas offered by synergetics relate not only to individual special cases in the field of physics and chemistry, but also to worldview foundations in general, are associated with the transition from a mechanistic picture of the world to the world of self-regulation and self-organization, characterized by the multivariance (nonlinearity) of possible development, and are capable of deriving legal science to a new higher level of knowledge.

Synergetics should not be reduced to the science of the role of chance in evolutionary development, of random processes (the relation to which the modern theory of state and law, based on dialectical materialism, is quite unambiguous).

First of all, synergetics studies self-organizing processes occurring in complex open systems.

The complexity of the system is determined by its internal structure (including various subsystems that function, including according to their own laws), as well as the irreversibility of development (i.e., the impossibility of bringing the system to exactly the same state as the original one). The openness of the system indicates that it can exchange energy, matter with the outside world (do not forget that initially it was about chemical and physical processes, and in relation to society, this can be any factors that affect its development, for example - information) .

To begin with, it is necessary to answer the question, do complex open systems fall into the field of view of legal science? Are there any among the objects of study of the theory of state and law?

In the state-legal sphere, we are constantly faced with aggregates that are systemic in nature and include a number of fairly independent components (subsystems) that develop, including according to their own internal laws. In addition, due to the constant interaction of most of these systems with the outside world, with various spheres of society, they are open (from the point of view of synergetics) in nature. As for the temporal criterion, the progressive, and, therefore, irreversible movement of society, and therefore of state-legal phenomena, forward seems obvious.

Moreover, complex open systems include not only those state-legal phenomena that the modern theory of state and law characterizes as systems, for example, the legal system (which includes, along with other components, the system of law and the system of legislation and is the most obvious example of a complex and open system ). These are also those phenomena that can be considered as components (subsystems) of more complex (not necessarily state-legal) associations, the life of which also proceeds according to the laws of self-regulation. For example, political, legal, economic system are elements of society as a whole (as a set of all existing connections). From this point of view, both the state and law can also be considered as primary components of complex open social systems.

Thus, if there are complex open systems in the state-legal sphere, then in their development and functioning they will also obey the laws of self-organization.

Moreover, the analysis of a number of state-legal phenomena from the standpoint of synergetics is original and can give very interesting results in terms of interaction, mutual influence of these phenomena on each other, and, perhaps, answer questions that exist in science. In this regard, Yu.Yu. Vetutnev to explore the legal system with the help of synergetics.

A.B. Vengerov believes that synergetics "offers a new perspective on the relationship between necessity and chance, on the role of chance in biological and social systems."

It can lead to a paradigm shift in science and claim the role of "a worldview approach that includes dialectics as a particular method." Consequently, the neglect of synergetics can lead to a lag in legal science from modern life, from a new picture of the world.

In this regard, the assessment of synergetics by philosophers is very interesting. So, E. Knyazeva and S. Kurdyumov point out that "synergetics can act as a methodological basis for prognostic and managerial activities in the modern world", emphasizing that the use of synergetics will make it possible to make the transition to non-linear (and, therefore, multidimensional) thinking , contributing to the convergence of the traditions of the West (with its linearity) and the East (with its holistic character), distinguished by integrity and the ability to choose options.

At present, given that synergetics is in the process of development and even in the field of natural science it has many opponents, one cannot count on its unconditional acceptance by all legal science, but it is necessary to keep it in mind when studying law.

There are a number of reasons for this:

Firstly, the use of a synergistic approach can help take a fresh look at the state-legal reality in general, at the role and value of the state and law in the life of society.

Secondly, the use of synergetics for the implementation of the prognostic function of the theory of state and law is no less important. The limits of legal influence, the content of law and the determination of optimal options for the legal regulation of certain relations, taking into account the self-regulation of the relevant systems, can also be studied through the prism of synergetics.

Thirdly, synergetics makes it possible to overcome the limitations (and sometimes artificiality) of classical mechanics - the progenitor of a number of modern research methods, in particular, dialectical with its rigid determinism and linearity of thinking, as well as cybernetic. The undertaken criticism will help to look at the use of traditional methods of the theory of state and law from other positions.

Materialistic and idealistic methods in the history of legal science

Being a generalizing category of all sciences, covering the study of all objects of the surrounding reality with a single system of concepts, principles, laws and categories, philosophy acts as a worldview basis for the knowledge of all phenomena of nature and society. It is a kind of key to the study, including the state and law. Only using such dialectical categories as essence and phenomenon, content and form, cause and effect, necessity and chance, possibility and reality, one can correctly and deeply comprehend and analyze the nature of many state-legal phenomena. The general philosophical method - the method of dialectical materialism is used in all sciences, at any stages, stages of scientific research.

He proceeds from the fundamental ideas that the world as a whole, including the state and law, is material, exists outside and independently of the will and consciousness of people, i.e. objectively, that the surrounding reality, the laws of its development are accessible to human knowledge, that the content of our knowledge is objectively predetermined by the existence of a real, independent of people's consciousness of the surrounding world. The materialistic approach determines that the state and law are not self-contained categories, independent of the surrounding world, not something invented by great thinkers and rulers, that their essence is objectively predetermined by the socio-economic structure of society, the level of its material and cultural development.

The essence of the dialectical approach to scientific research, justified by the great German philosopher G. Hegel and further developed by K. Marx and F. Engels, in relation to jurisprudence means that state-legal reality should be studied in close connection and interdependence with other phenomena of the economic, political and spiritual life of society (ideology, culture, morality, national relations, religion, the mentality of society, etc.), that the elements of the political and legal superstructure do not stand still, but change all the time, are in constant movement that the principle of historicism, the constant dynamics of the development of the essence of the state and law, their transition through the gradual accumulation of quantitative changes from one qualitative state to another - these are the necessary laws of human cognitive activity.

Dialectics presupposes a constant struggle between the new and the old, the obsolete and the emerging, the denial of negation as stages in the movement of the elements of nature and society (the present rejects certain elements of the past, and the germs of the future, in turn, deny the present that has not justified itself), the understanding that there is no abstract truth, it always concrete, that the truth of the conclusions of science is verified by practice, that the law of the progressive development of all elements of the reality around us, including the state and law, is the unity and struggle of opposites.

Metaphysics and dialectics in the history of legal science.

Metaphysics, after physics, was the original name of the philosophy course at Plato's Academy in Athens in the 6th-5th centuries BC. As a method, it found itself in the philosophy of the Middle Ages in the writings of Augustine of the Blessed, Thomas Aquinas. Ideas of immutability, static nature of the world created by God. The Creator is proclaimed as the source of non-existent changes.

flaws:

1) dogmatism - reliance on church dogma, inability to creatively analyze being;

2) eclecticism - unsystematic thinking, inability to apply the most effective method of analysis;

3) sophistry - strive to emphasize one of such a number of approaches, but as a rule, mistakenly replaces an effective method with an inefficient one.

In the 18th and 19th centuries, metaphysics allows for the recognition of variability, i.e. recognition of the importance of smooth, consistent change. + accepts social reforms; - reject the revolution.

Metaphysics cognizes that which cannot be cognized by other knowledge (religion).

Dialectics - the ability of scientists to conduct scientific debate.

Dialectics is the science of the most general laws of the development of nature, society and thought.

Ancient dialectics is a “spontaneous” phenomenon.

Gradually, the dialectical method is increasingly associated with the development of science.

3 laws of dialectics:

1. Unity and struggle of opposites (clarification of the main contradiction);

2. The transition of quantity into quality (change in a revolutionary way. The number of changes turns into quality);

3. Negations of negation - the movement of law through the negation of its forms, each new negation is its dialectical negation. The grain thrown into the ground undergoes a complete negation of the stem, the negation of the stem is a return to the previous state (ear) and a return to the previous state, but retaining everything positive that was during the first negation.

An illustration to the materialistic method of cognition - marxist theory the rights.

An illustration of the idealistic approach is the Hegelian understanding of law as freedom (freedom of conscience, protection of property and punishment for violations).

Principles of dialectics:

1) Universal connections (in the garden bead - in Kiev - uncle)

2) Law has a form, content and reasons for its occurrence

Dialectics is the most perfect tool in the knowledge of the state and law

The main contradiction is the contradiction between law and public life.

Yusnaturalizm and juspositivism in the understanding of law at different stages of the development of legal science.

Natural law approach. You need to know the periodization (editions): ancient (Ulpian and Cicero, you need to know the representatives and definitions) in which natural law was likened to the law of nature; medieval, theological or Christian (Thomas Aquinas), in which the obligation of natural law follows from the nature of things created by God, being, or from the nature of man created by God.

The Epistle of Paul - conscience is a natural law, laid down even in the hearts of the Gentiles; New time (17-18 centuries) is individualistic, rationalistic (Hugo Grotius, Immanuel Kant, Samuel Pufendorf, John Locke, etc.) in which natural law is identified with the rights and freedoms of man, which were derived by reason from reasonable human nature; revived natural law (after the Second World War and in the 20th century - in two stages) (P.I. Novgorodtsev, E.N. Trubetskoy, in Germany Rudolf Stammler, Gustav Radbruch, USA Lon Fuller - Polyakov does not agree). At this stage, natural law is a historically changeable set of moral requirements for subjective law.

That is, law is identified with morality - the main reproach. Here the idea of ​​natural law as an unshakable right is completely destroyed. Trubetskoy argued about this with Novgorodtsev. He said, if this is a criterion, an ideal, then how can it be changeable? It's like a meter with changing length or kg with changing weight. It is necessary to present the advantages and disadvantages of each approach, as well as features at each stage of development.

What all stages have in common:

1) natural law as perfect law is always opposed to positive law (in theory, the dualism of natural and positive law), that is, it must be understood that they logically mutually presuppose each other, like north and south.

2) is inherent in all but the last. Law is endowed with the property of constancy and immutability.

3) natural law is universal, in the sense that (Hugo Grotius) is equally suitable for all times and peoples.

It has the property of socio-cultural significance (universal). The shortcomings are formulated by the historical school of law, and in particular by the head of F.K. von Savigny, and another representative G. Puhta.

The historical school is formed in the 19th century. Disadvantages of natural law:

1) it is anti-historical, because it is derived from reason and it performs the function of a historically established legal order.

2) Natural law is a subjective construction, a product of the individual mind, and therefore subjective.

3) the a priori nature of natural law, since natural law has nothing to do with the social life of society, it is rational, but has nothing to do with life.

4) if both natural and positive law are still law, then they are like types of the generic concept of law, then they must have something in common that allows them to be classified as a kind of law. But they concluded that natural law is a phenomenon different from positive law.

Advantages:

1) the natural law approach, perhaps for the first time, indicates that the existence of law is not limited exclusively to state-established forms, it is not reducible only to the order of the sovereign, another thing is that they could not determine the boundaries of law, but that law cannot be identified with the order sovereign.

2) he singles out its value component in law, another thing is that he absolutizes, but the fact that there is a value component in law is clearly shown. Positive law in the social sense will operate when it corresponds to certain basic values ​​of social culture.

Legal positivism or legal statism

Usually they put an equal sign between them. For now, we will do the same, although positivism is broader. Formed in the second half of the 19th century, although the dominance of this approach was historically prepared in advance by the process of codification in Europe. Positivism takes shape as a scientific theory due to the emergence of its own scientific method. First, philosophical positivism appears, which becomes the basis for the emergence of legal positivism.

The representative of PHILOSOPHICAL positivism is Auguste Comte. Feature: jurisprudence must be an experimental science, that is, based on experimental facts that can be observed. It must be a descriptive science and a classifying science, that is, it observes, describes and classifies various facts, grouping the rules of law into groups. That is, jurisprudence as factual material, in the role of which norms act. This method is called dogmatic.

Signs of law in positivism:

1) official establishment,

2) formalization, that is, all law is expressed in the forms established by the state,

3) state power coercion.

Law is a set of norms established by the state and protected by its coercive force.

Advantages:

1) development of the normative aspect of law,

2) development of all legal terminology,

3) various constructions, techniques and principles of interpretation of law.

And there are so many shortcomings, but despite the fact that many critical statements have been made, he is invincible.

disadvantages:

1) it denies a legal character to social law, that is, the law in the creation of which the state did not take part, that is, canon law. Positivism cannot logically and consistently explain the legal nature of international law and constitutional law.

2) he excludes from his consideration questions about the justice of law. They consider it a metaphysical matter. Any order of the sovereign is a right.

3) the rule of law as the goal of the operation of law is considered in positivism exclusively as a result exclusively achieved by the efforts of state power, which acts primarily through coercion.

4) the statist definition of law contains a logical flaw, that is, the definition of something through the same thing. Initio per idem. Law - A set of norms established in the form prescribed by law, created in accordance with law by the bodies of the state, which itself is a legal union.

5) it is logically impossible to justify coercion as the main property of law. There is a norm. It will be legal only if there is, providing for a sanction for non-fulfilment. We do not find with a sanction for non-performance. This means that it is not a legal norm, and therefore the rest will not be legal. Hans Kelsen (normativist) understood this and said that one should simply postulate the existence of a basic norm that ensures the legal character of the remaining norms. Gave an example. Father you must go to school. Baby why should I?

Father because I am your father. Son why should I listen to you. Father because it is bequeathed by God. Son why should I listen to God. This rule cannot be questioned. Therefore, there are constitutions and laws. The constitution cannot be questioned. Representatives: John Austin, Jeremiah Bentham, in Russia Shershenevich, Herbert Hart, Hans Kelsen, but with the amendment that he does not have an statist point of view (for him, law is a hierarchy of norms, but this order is not always established by the state), Baitin in our time.

Laws and categories of dialectics in legal research

There are 3 basic laws of dialectics:

Unity and struggle of opposites, which lies in the fact that everything that exists consists of opposite principles, which, being united in nature, are in struggle and contradict each other (for example: day and night, hot and cold, black and white, winter and summer, etc.);

The transition of quantity into quality, which lies in the fact that with certain quantitative changes, quality necessarily changes, while quality cannot change indefinitely, there comes a moment when a change in quality leads to a change in measure - to a radical transformation of the essence of the object;

Negation of negation, which consists in the fact that the new always denies the old and takes its place, but gradually it itself turns from the new into the old and is denied by more and more new

The highest semantic constructs that generalize the content of dialectics are its principles.

Principles are the most fundamental scientific ideas that combine the reflection of the objective laws of being and the ways of their use by the subject in cognition and activity. For example, the dialectical principle of development states that development is a natural process inherent in any object of reality and, at the same time, that deep, true knowledge of an object is impossible without taking into account and studying the process of its development. As already noted, the basic principles of dialectics are the principles of universal connection, development, contradiction, systemicity. The highest of these principles is the principle of consistency.

Three other principles, having an independent meaning, simultaneously characterize the main aspects of systemicity: the principle of connection - characterizes the structural aspect, the principle of development - dynamic, the principle of contradiction - the sources of system action and system movement. The principle of universal connection is the starting point in the development of the content of dialectics. As noted, this is due to the fact that connectivity, interaction is the substantial basis of being. Without connectivity, the interaction of objects, development and consistency would be impossible. The inconsistency of objects is also an essential form and manifestation of their coherence.

The main principles of dialectics are:

The principle of universal communication,

The principle of consistency;

Causality principle;

the principle of historicism.

Universal connection means the integrity of the surrounding world, its internal unity, the interconnectedness of all its components - objects, phenomena, processes;

Links can be:

External and internal;

Direct and indirect;

Genetic and functional;

Spatial and temporal;

Random and regular.

The most common type of communication - external and internal. Example: internal connections of the human body as a biological system, external connections of a person as elements of a social system.

Consistency means that numerous connections in the world around us do not exist chaotically, but in an orderly manner. These links form an integral system in which they are arranged in a hierarchical order. Thanks to this, the surrounding world has an internal expediency.

Causality - the presence of such connections, where one gives rise to another. Objects, phenomena, processes of the surrounding world are conditioned by something, that is, they have either an external or internal cause. The cause, in turn, gives rise to the effect, and the connections as a whole are called cause-and-effect.

Historicism implies two aspects of the surrounding world:

Eternity, indestructibility of history, the world;

Its existence and development in time, which lasts forever.

Categories are the most general and fundamental concepts of science. For example, the categories of physics include such concepts as force, energy, charge, mass, quantum, etc. The dialectical categories include such concepts as contradiction, connection, development, system, necessity, chance, law, essence, phenomenon, etc.

Essence and phenomenon;

Cause and investigation;

Single, special, universal;

Possibility and reality;

Necessity and chance.

The categories of dialectics are often paired, for example: “phenomenon” and “essence”, “necessity” and “accident”, “cause” and “effect”, “form” and “content”, “general” and “single”, “ possibility” and “reality”, “system” and “element”, “structure” and “function”, “whole” and part”, etc. This indicates that, as elements of dialectics, most of its categories act as a manifestation of the operation of the law of contradiction. The laws of dialectics act as universal, necessary, essential, stable and recurring connections in nature, society and human thinking.

The law of inconsistency applies to any pair of dialectical categories. For example, "phenomenon" and "essence" are inextricably linked and do not exist separately from each other. The phenomenon is the outer side of the object, which is reflected by a person in sensual images, and the essence is the inner side of the object, inaccessible to sensual contemplation and comprehended only with the help of thinking. Every phenomenon carries its essence in itself, and every essence manifests itself in a number of phenomena. For example, the character of a person (essence) is manifested in his actions. The essence is the basis of the phenomenon, which defines and explains it, however, it does not exist somewhere along with the phenomenon, but is present in itself - this is the unity of opposites.

Necessity and contingency act as opposites only within certain limits, outside of them the same event can appear as necessary in one respect and as accidental in another. Necessity is the most important characteristic of the laws of development of natural, social and mental processes. So-called "pure" accidents do not exist, since the accidental in a certain respect is always necessary. “Pure” chance is often misunderstood as causelessness, but in fact everything in the world is causally conditioned.

Necessity is the dominant side of this contradiction, since chance is a manifestation of necessity. Just as the essence "manifests" itself in phenomena, and the general - in the individual, necessity does not exist "in its pure form", it makes its way through a mass of accidents, taking one form or another. This is especially evident in statistical regularities. Randomness acts as a form of manifestation and addition of necessity, enriching it with specific content. Often, random events can occur at the intersection of necessary causal relationships of different orders. This explains, for example, the variety of so-called "accidents" that unexpectedly changed the fate of a person.

Dialectical categories are closely related, so one pair of categories can be defined in terms of other categorical pairs. Thus, necessity and contingency appear different ways turning possibility into reality. The more complex the system is organized, the more development opportunities it has and the greater the role of chance in its functioning.

Principles of historicism, consistency and objectivity in the study of state and law

the principle of historicism. All phenomena must be studied with regard to their historical development; for example, one can understand the essence and specifics of the state only by tracing various historical types state, thus its unchanging essential characteristics will come to light and transitory factors will disappear.

Scientific knowledge of social phenomena invariably presupposes the application of the principle of the historical approach, which requires studying the history of the emergence of social phenomena and processes, the main stages of their historical development, and considering the current state of these phenomena as a result, the result of previous development.

Due to the fact that the world is in constant development, change, scientific knowledge also has a specific historical character; they are reliable insofar as they correspond to a certain state in the development of the subject. The subsequent development of this subject means that the scientific information available about him is outdated and needs to be changed, supplemented in accordance with the changes that the object reflected by them has undergone. Taking into account this circumstance, the principle of a concrete-historical approach to the knowledge of the phenomena under study and the recognition of the concrete-historical, relative nature of scientific truth are among the universal logical requirements. There is no abstract, suitable for all time truth, it always has a concrete historical character.

The principle of systematic research. All phenomena are interconnected, therefore it would be wrong to study any phenomenon in isolation from the factors associated with them; for example, law is studied in relation to the state; this means that all phenomena are studied in a system, in a complex.

The principle of objectivity means that in the process of cognition it is necessary to approach the phenomena and objects under study as they exist in reality, without conjecturing and without adding to them anything that is not actually in them. In the light of this requirement, it is necessary to consider the state and law in the process of their centuries-old development, in their actual connections and relations, to be able to distinguish the thoughts and motives of politicians and lawyers from the actual direction of legislation, ultimately determined by the economic relations of society.

Synergetics in the science of law.

Russian and foreign lawyers place great hopes on synergetics as a modern method of scientific knowledge that can qualitatively improve the process of cognition of legal phenomena and the social facts that determine their development. Synergetics is a new scientific direction that was formed in Russia 20 years ago, investigating the mechanisms of transition of complex systems from disorder (chaos) to order.

A. B. Vengerov interpreted the essence of synergetics and its methodological possibilities as follows. He recognized that “the system (political, legal, economic) is subject to various influences (fluctuations - deviations, disturbances). And if the system is in a non-equilibrium, unstable, crisis state, then the process of influence (fluctuations) reaches a critical point - a bifurcation point, at which the state of the system becomes maximally uncertain, indeterministic, random. In this state, sometimes it is chance that pushes the system in an unexpected, unpredictable direction. Here, a random small, sometimes insignificant and even unnoticed impact can generate enormous changes in the entire structure of the system and for the entire system. The system makes a new choice and already in a new quality, in a new content, obeys the principle of determinism.

Thus, A. B. Vengerov assured, synergetics acts “already as a new worldview, a worldview that radically changes the understanding of the necessary (regular, deterministic) and random in the very foundations of the world order ... In a word, we are apparently talking about - not more and nothing less - about changing the paradigm of the social sciences... and about rethinking materialistic dialectics as the main method of scientific knowledge of reality" . As a result, dialectics becomes only a particular method of synergetics. Moreover, the cited author believed that dialectics, which is based on the primacy of the necessary over random and other postulates, under the pressure of new knowledge of the late 20th century. basically exhausted its cognitive and prognostic material in the social sphere, including in jurisprudence.

However, these conclusions of A. B. Vengerov about the role of synergetics in the social sciences in general and in jurisprudence in particular did not receive support from other authors. Thus, Yu. Yu. Vetutnev was critical of the characterization of synergetics in the interpretation of A. B. Vengerov and came to the conclusion that “synergetics for legal science is not a method of scientific knowledge in its pure form, but performs a slightly different role. The synergetic approach offers a general model for describing the processes taking place in the legal system, defines the problem statement and provides the relevant scientific terminology. It has ideological significance and occupies an intermediate position between the paradigm and the scientific method. The methods and techniques of synergetic research are based on mathematical methods that are not widely used in legal science. Therefore, lawyers should hardly count on the effective assistance of synergetics in the near future.

It is characteristic that A. B. Vengerov carried on agitation for synergetics and its disproportionately large methodological potentials in words. Later, when expounding the theory of law, he turned to the traditional dogmatic, formal legal method; he did not describe or explain any bifurcations or fluctuations in the field of law. Although, it would seem, who, if not the founder of synergetics in jurisprudence, should have shown its real potential by creative application and obtaining such results that even a mossy retrograde could not but recognize as a new branch, a new direction in the development of jurisprudence. Moreover, the author undertook to show how the postulates of synergetics work in the theory of law, but, alas, this promise was not realized by him.

As follows from the explanations of A. B. Vengerov, synergetics is the science of "self-organizing random processes", in which "it is the case that pushes the system in an unexpected, unpredictable direction." However, such an understanding of the random is the result of a significant coarsening, simplification of the actual interconnection of phenomena and processes. The recognition of some phenomena as a necessary cause, and others as an accidental one, occurs only in those cases when these phenomena are pulled out of their real, concrete connections and are considered in isolation.

In real life, we recognize the observed processes as random only on the grounds that the patterns that should have acted under given conditions did not manifest themselves properly and instead of the expected results, we have other - unforeseen.

For example, communist party was sure that, relying on political, economic and other laws, she built a developed socialist society in the USSR, and the collapse of the Soviet state was an accidental event. However, can this event be called really accidental, and not a natural result of the party's apparent bankruptcy, its inability not only to understand the regular course of social phenomena and processes, but also to ensure the functioning of the party on truly democratic principles, to ensure freedom of criticism and discussion of current issues of the life and activities of the party? ? The party, which has lost touch with life, unable to understand social processes and manage them, not by chance, but naturally, found itself in the place that it honestly deserved - in the margins of history.

But synergetics is far from the idea of ​​finding out the regular connections of the researched. For her, they are a priori defined, formalized and expressed using the appropriate mathematical formulas. This way of knowing a regular connection is possible in technical and natural sciences, but it is unacceptable in legal science, where, as Yu. Yu. Vetutnev correctly noted, mathematical methods are not widely used for objective reasons. The cognition of specific actual connections of legal phenomena is carried out not formally logically, according to certain formulas, but concretely historically, with a detailed clarification of all empirically observed connections and dependencies of the researched. Moreover, this knowledge is conducted at the empirical level through the collection and generalization of the necessary empirical information.

Everything recognized as accidental, secondary remains at the empirical stage of scientific knowledge, since the subject of the theoretical level of research is the general, essential, necessary. Consequently, random event, which has become the cause of development, change of the studied phenomenon, process, has a chance to become the object of theoretical analysis with the only possible condition that an event, a phenomenon, initially perceived as random, in reality is an expression of the natural and therefore is subject to a detailed analysis at the stage of theoretical knowledge.

Synergetic descriptions of the mechanisms of development, changes in open systems in jurisprudence can be used in predictive studies based on the formation of mathematical and conceptual models of the transition paths of the current state of the studied state into the future state. In particular, when making forecasts, the provisions of synergetics are of considerable interest that the most significant and radical transformations of legal life originate in areas that, from the point of view of the current order, are “shadow”, that, in addition to simple attractors, there may be “strange”, i.e., unstable, chaotic states. Noteworthy is the conclusion that multiple factors influencing the development of the phenomena under study are in hierarchical relationships with each other, etc.

Thus, in our opinion, synergetics, the new effective ways of knowing accidents developed by it in direct practice, can be used only at the empirical stage of scientific knowledge or when conducting predictive studies of the development of the state and law. At the theoretical stage, synergetics, like other empirical methods, will be powerless. In any case, synergetics cannot replace dialectical materialism as a philosophical doctrine of the universal laws governing the development of nature, society and thinking.

Systemic and structural-functional analysis of state and law.

Since in immediate reality legal and other phenomena are in stable connection with each other, mutually determine each other, then scientific knowledge cannot be limited to identifying only the essential features of the phenomena under study. The concepts obtained in the process of ascent from the concrete to the abstract must be given the same connection between themselves as the phenomena and processes of objective reality they reflect. To this end, said K. Marx, you need to go back, where "abstract definitions lead to the reproduction of the concrete through thinking." Following this path, legal science gets the opportunity to cognize law as a complex systemic formation, in all the variety of its components and their connections between themselves and other social phenomena, or, in other words, as a total integrity.

To identify and substantiate the systemic relationships of legal phenomena, systems theory and the system-structural method based on it are used.

According to systems theory, there are two types of system structure of phenomena and processes: organic and summative. Organic systems include such integral formations that have the property of integrativity, i.e., a set of properties that are not inherent in their constituent components. Summative systems, in contrast to organic ones, are a mechanical association, where the whole is only quantitatively different from its constituent parts, for example, a pile of grain, sand, a shop window.

The correlation of an organic system with its elements has a complex dialectical character. An organic system does not simply perceive its components as such, but changes them in relation to its own nature, endowing it with new features and properties. Thus, social relations, clothed in a legal form, acquire its specific features. The conditions for the emergence, subjects, content, measures of protection against violations and other significant features of social relations are fixed by the rules of law. Thanks to the law, social relations acquire a stable, generally binding character, are reliably protected by the state from any attempts to violate subjective rights or default on legal obligations. Any legal phenomenon has features that define it as a component of the legal system.

Among the variety of phenomena and processes studied by legal science, there are both summative and organic phenomena. Numerous classifications of legal norms according to the ways of their presentation, the method of legal regulation, the functions they perform, etc. can serve as examples of summative phenomena. Due to the fact that summative phenomena do not have structural links that determine the organic integrity of the phenomenon, they cannot be the -structural analysis. The latter is used to study the structure of only organically integral phenomena, processes, for example, the systemic structure of a legal relationship, a rule of law, a specific legal institution.

Thus, the subject of system-structural research in jurisprudence is the structural connections inherent in the elements of organically integral phenomena and processes. Filling in the gaps in the process of ascent from the concrete to the abstract, the system-structural approach is focused on identifying the links inherent in the components of the phenomenon (internal links), as well as the links of the phenomenon with other legal and social phenomena (external links).

The object of the system-structural approach can be the most diverse range of sources containing reliable information about the phenomena under study. These can be, firstly, scientific publications that contain empirical data on the studied phenomena, their components, features of functioning and development, secondly, publications that substantiate the essence of the studied phenomena, their distinctive features, and, thirdly, written sources (documents) testifying to the direct, real existence of these phenomena. In the process of system-structural analysis, the researcher does not need to independently conduct empirical research if he can obtain the required data from scientific publications. However, in cases where these data are missing or there are doubts about their reliability, the researcher has no choice but to independently conduct empirical scientific research, as well as the ascent from the concrete to the abstract.

The fundamental principle of materialistic epistemology - the objectivity of cognition - must be carried out in the most thorough manner, and before proceeding to the cognition of the subject of system-structural analysis, it is necessary to have complete and reliable data obtained at the previous stages of cognition.

System-structural analysis is designed to:

1) identify legal phenomena that are organic systems;

2) to reveal specific connections and dependencies that characterize the organic connections of the phenomenon as a whole with its constituent elements, as well as the connections of elements among themselves;

3) explore the connections and dependencies inherent in the phenomenon as a component of a more complex systemic formation;

4) describe the relationship of legal phenomena with economic, political and other social phenomena.

For system-structural analysis, it is of particular importance to identify the forms and intensity of the impact of specific historical conditions on the structural state of the phenomenon under study and its response to external factors.

Achieving the goals of system-structural analysis is ensured through the following research procedures:

1) collection of reliable and complete information;

2) determination of the type of organic bond inherent in the phenomenon under study;

3) description and explanation of the internal structural relationships of the subject;

4) description and explanation of the external structural relationships of the subject;

5) description and explanation of the intensity and results of the impact of the external environment on the structure of the phenomenon under study;

6) presentation of the research results.

Procedures focused on obtaining knowledge about the object of study are carried out using methods used at the stage of empirical knowledge and ascent to legal abstractions. Information about the object of research missing for system-structural analysis can be obtained by the same procedures and using the same methods as in studies specially conducted to collect empirical information or form the conceptual apparatus of legal science. Research procedures related to obtaining reliable knowledge about the subject of system-structural research are carried out using the principles of the system-structural approach and logical methods.

The system-structural approach as a general method of scientific knowledge was developed in the middle of the 20th century, and attempts to apply it in legal science date back to the 1970s. It should be noted that a significant part of Soviet jurists pinned great hopes on this method, associated with it the development of certain aspects of the methodology of historical materialism, the opening of new horizons in the science of management, in understanding the essence of legal phenomena, their main (and secondary) internal and external relations, hoped using this method "to take a fresh approach" and even "to overcome the gap characteristic of mechanism." However, the hopes of Soviet jurists turned out to be illusory, there was no big breakthrough in the development of legal science, on the contrary, there was a clear regression. Since the 1990s Russian jurists resolutely abandoned the methodology of dialectical materialism, preferring to it the methodology of idealism and positivism.

It is not his fault that the system-structural approach did not justify the hopes of Soviet jurists, since it was associated with solving problems that require the use of cognitive means that are not inherent in this approach. At the same time, the system-structural approach, being one of the general methods of scientific cognition, has been and remains an effective method of cognizing the structural relationships of organically integral phenomena, and as such it is successfully used in legal science, to which I drew attention back in 1980. S. Samoshchenko. He noted that “the systems approach gives the greatest effect when studying not all systems, but, first of all, organically integral systems. In other cases, it is rather about the application of concepts and categories of a systematic approach to the description of certain objects, or even simply about the use of systemic concepts.

The systematic approach is applied in a differentiated way, taking into account the peculiarities of the structural structure of organically integral legal phenomena. There are three types of structural links in legal science: synthetic, hierarchical (vertical) and external (functional).

The synthetic type of structural connection is inherent in the elements of an offense, legal relationship, rule of law. This type of connection is characterized by the fact that an organically integral phenomenon consists, firstly, of a strictly defined number of elements, and secondly, each element of the system has a special

Read also: admin. legal regulation in the field of education and science. Axioms of the analytic-hierarchical process. General assessment of AIP as a decision-making method. Joint-stock companies in the tourism sector, their essence and types. Analysis of the use of net profit is carried out using the method of vertical and horizontal analysis, for which the indicators are grouped in a table similar to table 20. Analysis of the financial and economic activities of the enterprise, its essence and role in production management. Anti-crisis management in the organization: essence and necessity. Ticket 2 question Concept, essence and principles of social policy Ticket number 34. Strategic management of the organization. Goals, tasks, essence.

legal science- this is a system of knowledge about the state and law in general and certain aspects of state-legal reality.

Characteristic features of legal science: Legal science is a special field of knowledge in the system of the humanities; Within the bounds of legal science, theoretical and applied development of the state and law is carried out; task legal science is - knowledge of the laws of the state-legal life of society;
legal science is a system of objective, reliable knowledge about the state and law. Knowledge about the state and law is based on the achievements of other social sciences, and is also tested by practice.

concept methodology science is used in two senses: in the narrow sense - as the doctrine of the principles, methods, techniques of scientific knowledge of the subject of the theory of law and state, and in the broad sense. Methodology of the theory of law and state in the latter sense, it is a set of scientific principles, methodological approaches, methods of cognition and the worldview of the researcher, as well as a system of legal (and state studies) concepts and categories developed by science that serve as tools for understanding the state and law.

Under methodology understood as a system of principles and methods of organizing and constructing theoretical and practical activities, as well as the doctrine of this system. IN methodology content included :

Principles of scientific knowledge;

Scientific approaches (for example, formational and civilizational, used in the study of the typology of the state and legal systems; integrative approach - in the study of the essence of law, etc.);

Methods of knowledge;

The worldview of the researcher (the scientist takes a monistic position or is based on a multidimensional vision of state science and legal problems);

To the principles of knowledge science of science refers to the initial, guiding ideas, provisions that the researcher must be guided by. The principles of knowledge are an integral part of the universal, or dialectical, method. Such principles are formulated by dialectical logic, and they include:

-principle of objectivity , meaning that in the process of cognition one should approach the studied phenomena as they exist in reality, without distorting their essence, without idealizing them;

-the principle of comprehensive knowledge;

-the principle of historicism of knowledge, indicating that the phenomenon under study should be considered in development. With regard to the state and law, this means that it is necessary to find out how this phenomenon arose, what reasons gave rise to it and contributed to its formation and development. There are a number of other scientific principles that are not included in this list.

Along with the principles, the initial methodological guidelines for any research are laws of dialectics :

The law of the transition of quantitative changes into qualitative ones (an increase in the number of norms and institutions in the tax sphere led to the separation from financial law of such an area as tax law);

The law of the unity and struggle of opposites (the unity of rights and duties; correspondence in the legal relationship of duty to subjective law);

The law of negation of negation (in the legal system of Russia there are elements of the legal system of the past and future of Russia).

Scientific approaches - it is a methodological compass that shows the researcher the direction of research, the choice of means of cognition, and to a large extent determines his worldview. Scientific approaches - this is a kind of cognition strategy chosen by the researcher, a methodological platform on which his views are based in the study of state and law. There are formational and civilizational approaches used in the study of the typology of the state and legal systems; natural law, sociological, normative, integrative approaches - in the study of the essence of law.

The central component of the methodology is method, which is understood as a way of knowing the subject of science. In jurisprudence, methods of cognition are the tool that allows you to penetrate the legal fabric and know it. The following groups of methods are distinguished:

1) general philosophical method. It is used in all specific sciences, at all stages of scientific knowledge. The general method is the method of materialistic dialectics.

Method of materialistic dialectics, combining the dialectical approach to the knowledge of the surrounding world with its materialistic understanding, is the most effective way to study natural, social and mental processes.

When studying law, the method of materialistic dialectics is manifested in the fact that the state and law are considered as phenomena that, firstly, are determined by human nature, socio-economic, political, spiritual and other conditions of society.

Secondly, they are most closely connected with other social phenomena. It is difficult to find in society a sphere of social relations where the state and law would not manifest themselves. Correlating the state and law with other social phenomena, one can determine their characteristic features, role and place in society. That is why the state is compared with political system society, politics, public formations, and law - with the economy, legal consciousness, morality, customs.

Thirdly, the state and law are constantly evolving. Each new stage in the progressive movement of society is also a new stage in the development of the state and law.

2) general scientific methods. These include:

Analysis and synthesis;

Induction and deduction;

Climbing from the abstract to the concrete and from the concrete to the abstract;

The method of unity of historical and logical.

Systems approach,

Comparison;

Comparative method. It involves comparing state-legal concepts, phenomena and processes and clarifying similarities or differences between them. As a result of the comparison, the qualitative state of the state-legal systems as a whole or their individual institutions and norms is established. Compared objects must meet one general requirement: they must be comparable. It is possible to compare political, state, legal systems, branches of law, legal institutions and norms of the same name. You can do the same within a separate legal system. But one cannot compare, for example, the legal system as a whole and a separate legal norm. These objects are incomparable in terms of level, volume, content and characteristics.

If high-level objects that are complex in structure (for example, states or legal systems of various countries) are compared, then this will be macro comparison . A comparison of less voluminous, simpler in structure objects (legal institutions, legal norms, crime in certain regions of Russia, etc.) is called microcomparison.

Only by comparing the state-legal material and obtaining the results, it is possible to determine specific ways to improve state-legal systems, improve legislation, strengthen law and order.

Boolean method. It includes means and methods of logical study and explanation of law and is based on the forms of thinking and the laws of formal logic.

Each of the laws of logic (identity, contradiction, excluded third, sufficient reason) fully manifests itself in law, reflecting its features. All basic legal procedures and processes (and, above all, law-making and law enforcement) are built in strict accordance with the forms of thinking - the rules for operating with concepts, judgments, and conclusions.

Any legal norm is a judgment, and it must meet the requirements of judgment.

The application of a rule of law to a specific situation, a specific person, is a deductive conclusion (syllogism), where the rule of law is a major premise, the case under consideration is a minor premise, and the decision in the case is a conclusion. Logical operations and methods of proof, analogies have been in the arsenal of jurisprudence since ancient times.

The use of logical means in the study and explanation of law makes it possible to avoid contradictions in the construction of legislation, to build a logically consistent and thereby effective system rights, agree on the positive, i.e. existing law, with the requirements of natural law, finally, correctly and competently apply legal norms.

Analysis phenomena involves dividing them into parts and then studying each of these parts. For example, in the category "system of law" the concepts of industry, sub-sector, institution and rule of law are singled out and studied.

Unlike the analysis , synthesis , - it is the study of a particular phenomenon in the unity of all its constituent parts. For example, when it comes to law, it is supposed to study the unity of legal norms, legal customs, religious norms, etc. Analysis and synthesis are not only interconnected, but also complement each other.

In accordance with historicism method state-legal reality must be approached as changing in time, developing. In various philosophical systems, the method under consideration is interpreted differently. If, for example, in Marxism, when explaining the reasons for the development of society, the state, and law, priority is given to the economy, then in non-Marxist teachings - to ideas.

System method is a study of the state and law, as well as individual state-legal phenomena from the standpoint of their consistency, i.e. inclusion in the corresponding system. State and law can themselves be considered as a system. In this case, intra-system connections are analyzed already within the framework of the state and law itself.

Closely related to the system functional , which consists in clarifying the functions of the state and law and their elements (functions of the state, functions of legal responsibility, etc.).

hermeneutical method, used in jurisprudence, proceeds from the fact that the text of the norm is a document of a special worldview. Therefore, it needs to be interpreted on the basis of a person's "inner experience" and his direct perception of "vital integrity." Any epoch can be understood only from the point of view of its own logic. For a lawyer to understand the meaning of a law that was in force in the distant past, it is not enough to know its text. He must understand what content was invested in the corresponding concepts in that era.

3) special methods or methods of specific sciences - statistical, concrete sociological, psychological, mathematical, cybernetic, etc. In jurisprudence, they are used quite widely, especially in the study of applied problems of science;

Sociological (concrete sociological) method. It consists in the study of the state and law on the basis of the actual data of state science and jurisprudence. Legal material in this case is considered not at the level of abstract categories, but on the basis of specific facts. The sociological method of studying state and law includes such methods as the analysis of statistical data and various kinds of documents, social and legal experiment, population surveys, mathematical and statistical methods of processing material, and some others.

Statistical method based on the analysis of quantitative indicators that reflect the state and dynamics of a particular phenomenon (for example, crime, the level of legality, etc.). It includes observation of phenomena, summary processing of data, their analysis, and is used in the study of phenomena that are characterized by mass character and recurrence.

Modeling method - it is the mental creation of models of state-legal phenomena and the manipulation of these models. This method is aimed at finding the best solutions to specific problems.

Method of social and legal experiment It consists in creating legal norms on an experimental basis and testing their operation in specific conditions. The possibilities of this method are extremely limited.

cybernetic method- this is a technique associated with the use of the concepts and technical means of cybernetics (for example, the concepts of "control", "feedback"), etc. This method is used to develop automated processing, storage, and search for legal information.

4) private law, or special legal methods. They are used at the stage of knowledge of legal practice.

1. Formal legal, or legal-technical, dogmatic method is used for knowledge of the external and internal forms of legal phenomena. Allows, on the basis of generalization, to formulate concepts, definitions, definitions (legal personality, subjective right, guilt).

2. Law Interpretation Methods are intended to clarify the true will of the legislator, expressed in the text of the law.

3. Comparative legal method based on the consistent study and comparison of a large number of similar objects. Thus, the advantages and disadvantages of a state or legal institution are determined in comparison with similar institutions in foreign countries.

4. Method of state-legal modeling is used to search for an optimal model for organizing the state apparatus, rationalizing the administrative-territorial division, forming a system of legislation, etc.

5. Law-making experiment method applied for approbation of both a new legislative act and individual legal institutions (a set of legal norms in the draft law).