Roman Iustitia Naturalis and Modern Positivist Justice

L. Kofanov
{"title":"Roman Iustitia Naturalis and Modern Positivist Justice","authors":"L. Kofanov","doi":"10.37399/2686-9241.2022.1.144-168","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction. The modern definition of the concept of “justice” is too narrow when we compare it to the famous Roman classical definition of the concept of iustitia as a synonym for justness. Justness is expressed by the constant will to “grant everyone their right”. Ancient thinkers associated the concept of justice with natural law, which unfortunately, is almost lost in modern legal theory. Theoretical Basis. Methods. The article was prepared using general scientific methods (systemic, logical) and special legal methods (comparative legal, formal legal). Results. The concept of “justice” arguably first appeared in Ancient Greece during the 6th to 2nd centuries BC in the philosophy of Pythagoras, Plato, Aristotle and the Stoics. Plato contrasted this understanding of justice with the right of the strong. In the first century BC, Cicero developed this concept further, stating that justice proceeds from natural law, based on the principles of love, friendship, trust and consent. As these principles do not apply equally at different levels (that is, in the family, between friends, between trade partners, between fellow citizens, between foreigners, etc.), the main task of justice is to make an honest allocation of justness to everyone. The Roman lawyer and philosopher would argue that human laws that reject iustitia naturalis lead to lawlessness and the collapse of society. In discussion with Carneades, (who argued that natural justice is folly, and that real civil justice is based on the protection of the benefit or utilitas of the strongest), Cicero argued that without mutual love, trust and friendship, the common benefit of society as a whole, based on the fundamental concept of honesty (honestum), suffers. These principles were adopted by the Roman classical jurists and Justinian compilers in the famous definition of iustitia. Discussion and Сonclusion. Unfortunately, modern positivism in its most extreme manifestation of “pure law” has abandoned the ideas of “natural justice”. This is evidenced by the separation of the principles of morality based on nature, that is, customary law, as a centuries-old practice of regulating relations in society. The result is a significant weakening of the principles of natural unity of people in societies of all levels, including the international human community.","PeriodicalId":184770,"journal":{"name":"Pravosudie / Justice","volume":"39 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pravosudie / Justice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.37399/2686-9241.2022.1.144-168","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction. The modern definition of the concept of “justice” is too narrow when we compare it to the famous Roman classical definition of the concept of iustitia as a synonym for justness. Justness is expressed by the constant will to “grant everyone their right”. Ancient thinkers associated the concept of justice with natural law, which unfortunately, is almost lost in modern legal theory. Theoretical Basis. Methods. The article was prepared using general scientific methods (systemic, logical) and special legal methods (comparative legal, formal legal). Results. The concept of “justice” arguably first appeared in Ancient Greece during the 6th to 2nd centuries BC in the philosophy of Pythagoras, Plato, Aristotle and the Stoics. Plato contrasted this understanding of justice with the right of the strong. In the first century BC, Cicero developed this concept further, stating that justice proceeds from natural law, based on the principles of love, friendship, trust and consent. As these principles do not apply equally at different levels (that is, in the family, between friends, between trade partners, between fellow citizens, between foreigners, etc.), the main task of justice is to make an honest allocation of justness to everyone. The Roman lawyer and philosopher would argue that human laws that reject iustitia naturalis lead to lawlessness and the collapse of society. In discussion with Carneades, (who argued that natural justice is folly, and that real civil justice is based on the protection of the benefit or utilitas of the strongest), Cicero argued that without mutual love, trust and friendship, the common benefit of society as a whole, based on the fundamental concept of honesty (honestum), suffers. These principles were adopted by the Roman classical jurists and Justinian compilers in the famous definition of iustitia. Discussion and Сonclusion. Unfortunately, modern positivism in its most extreme manifestation of “pure law” has abandoned the ideas of “natural justice”. This is evidenced by the separation of the principles of morality based on nature, that is, customary law, as a centuries-old practice of regulating relations in society. The result is a significant weakening of the principles of natural unity of people in societies of all levels, including the international human community.
罗马自然法与现代实证主义正义
介绍。当我们将“正义”概念的现代定义与著名的罗马古典定义(iustitia概念作为正义的同义词)进行比较时,它过于狭隘。正义表现为“赋予每个人权利”的永恒意志。古代思想家将正义的概念与自然法联系在一起,不幸的是,这在现代法律理论中几乎消失了。理论基础。方法。本文采用一般的科学方法(系统的、逻辑的)和特殊的法律方法(比较法、形式法)编写。结果。可以说,“正义”的概念最早出现在公元前6至2世纪的古希腊,在毕达哥拉斯、柏拉图、亚里士多德和斯多葛派的哲学中。柏拉图将这种对正义的理解与强者的权利进行了对比。公元前一世纪,西塞罗进一步发展了这一概念,指出正义源于自然法则,基于爱、友谊、信任和同意的原则。由于这些原则在不同的层面(即家庭之间、朋友之间、贸易伙伴之间、同胞之间、外国人之间等)并不平等适用,正义的主要任务是将正义诚实地分配给每个人。这位罗马律师和哲学家认为,拒绝自然法的人类法律会导致无法无天和社会崩溃。在与卡尔内阿德斯的讨论中(卡尔内阿德斯认为自然正义是愚蠢的,真正的民事正义是建立在保护最强者的利益或效用的基础上的),西塞罗认为,如果没有相互的爱、信任和友谊,基于诚实(诚实)这一基本概念的整个社会的共同利益就会受到损害。这些原则被罗马古典法学家和查士丁尼的编纂者采纳,形成了著名的“尤斯蒂亚”定义。讨论和Сonclusion。不幸的是,现代实证主义在其“纯粹法”的最极端表现中抛弃了“自然正义”的观念。基于自然的道德原则,即习惯法的分离,证明了这一点,习惯法作为一种几百年来调节社会关系的做法。其结果是大大削弱了包括国际人类社会在内的各级社会中人们自然团结的原则。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信