Affiliation:
1. Institute of Philosophy, Russian Academy of Sciences
Abstract
The article reconstructs the premises of the reception of analytic philosophy in jurisprudence and shows that the development of a method for clarifying the meanings of legal concepts is not least connected with the problem of legitimizing law enforcement. The article analyzes H.L.A. Hart’s approach to the problem of correlation between the “letter” and “spirit” of the law in the process of interpreting legal norms. The article argues that the process of interpretation is determined teleologically. In its limit, the interpretation of legal norms presupposes the re-creation of the desired image of society, the reconstruction of such social ontology that is most consistent with the ideal of achieving social welfare. The article examines the collision of the “ideal of order” and the “ideal of justice” as two regulations of law enforcement. The author believes that the interpretation of this collision within the analytical tradition was characterized by a gradual movement from the ideal of “mechanical” law enforcement, which minimizes the creative role of the interpreter, to the ideal of flexible interpretation focused on achieving legal goals in a changing environment. It is noted that, according to analytic approach, a theoretical solution to this conflict was proposed due to the development of the ideas of an “open texture” of law (H.L.A. Hart, F. Waismann). The author demonstrates that the development of the analytic tradition in jurisprudence has shown that the criticism of language and the interpretation of meanings are not technical tasks, but it presupposes the construction of a metaphysics of law. In this regard, the author concludes: the development of the ideas of the analytic tradition in jurisprudence demonstrates that the thesis about the absence of a positive program in analytic philosophy, put forward in the first (A.L. Nikiforov’s) article of the discussion, can be challenged.
Publisher
Humanist Publishing House
Reference8 articles.
1. Bodenheimer E. (2017) Modern Analytical Jurisprudence and the Limits of its Usefulness. In: Hart H.L.A. Philosophy and the Language of Law (pp. 271–280). Moscow: Kanon+, ROOI Reabilitatsiya (Russian translation).
2. Fuller L.L. (2017) Positivism and Fidelity to Law: A Reply to Professor Hart. In: Hart H.L.A. Philosophy and the Language of Law (pp. 281–333). Moscow: Kanon+, ROOI Reabilitatsiya (Russian translation).
3. Hart H.L.A. (1961) The Concept of Law. Oxford: Clarendon Press (Russian translation: Saint Petersburg: Saint Petersrburg State University, 2007).
4. Luhmann N. (1988) Closure and Openness: on Reality in the World of Law. In: Teubner G. (Ed.) Autopoietic Law: A New Approach to Law and Society (pp. 335–348). Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 1988,
5. Ogleznev V.V. (2019) Open Texture of Empirical Definitions and Linguistic Anti-Redutionism of Friedrich Waismann. Epistemology & Philosophy of Science. Vol. 56, no. 3, pp. 110–122 (in Russian).