法律解释的多种理论途径

A. Shevchenko, S. Kudin
{"title":"法律解释的多种理论途径","authors":"A. Shevchenko, S. Kudin","doi":"10.33663/2524-017x-2021-12-17","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The article explores the variety of theoretical approaches to legal interpretation. It has been determined that the variety of approaches to legal interpretation is due to the complexity of the nature of the origin of this phenomenon, the conditions for the development of post-non-classical science, and the recent influence of the paradigm of comparism, which assumes pluralism of opinions and ideas in legal research. It was found that in modern science there are four traditional theoretical approaches to the essence of legal interpretation. It has been determined that the content of the first approach is revealed within the framework of legal hermeneutics through a number of categories. The essence of the second approach (formal dogmatic or static) is expressed in the fact that the subject of interpretation must strictly and rigorously follow the letter of the law, establish only the meaning of the normative legal act, which the lawmaking body enshrined in it at the time of the publication of the act. That is why normative legal acts cannot, through interpretation, adapt to the changing economic, social, political, cultural internal and external conditions of public life.\n\nIt is proved that the essence of the dynamic theoretical approach lies in the fact that the subject of legal interpretation adapts the normative legal act to the changes that occur in various social relations. It was found that there is a contradiction between the dynamic and static approaches in legal interpretation, which is reflected in the traditionally called objective and subjective theories of interpretation. According to the subjective theory, the purpose of legal interpretation is to establish the «will of the legislator», and according to the objective theory – to establish the «will of the law». It has been substantiated that the essence of the activity approach is that interpretation is considered as a special kind of legal activity aimed at understanding and clarifying the content of legal texts.\n\nThe authors of this article point out that in order to establish the true nature of legal interpretation, the methodological foundations of the study should be presented much broader and more diverse, and not be limited only to traditional approaches. When studying it, a comprehensive, integrative approach is needed, which, based on the relevance of interdisciplinary relationships, would include logical, language (linguistic), philosophical, sociological, psychological, axiological (value), ethical, legal, historical, economic, political, mathematical and other substantiation of legal interpretation.\n\nKeywords: diversity, theoretical approach, legal interpretation, interpretive practice, integrative approach","PeriodicalId":359905,"journal":{"name":"THE INTERPRETATION OF LAW: FROM THE THEORY TO THE PRACTICE","volume":"30 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Variety of theoretical approaches to legal interpretation\",\"authors\":\"A. Shevchenko, S. Kudin\",\"doi\":\"10.33663/2524-017x-2021-12-17\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The article explores the variety of theoretical approaches to legal interpretation. It has been determined that the variety of approaches to legal interpretation is due to the complexity of the nature of the origin of this phenomenon, the conditions for the development of post-non-classical science, and the recent influence of the paradigm of comparism, which assumes pluralism of opinions and ideas in legal research. It was found that in modern science there are four traditional theoretical approaches to the essence of legal interpretation. It has been determined that the content of the first approach is revealed within the framework of legal hermeneutics through a number of categories. The essence of the second approach (formal dogmatic or static) is expressed in the fact that the subject of interpretation must strictly and rigorously follow the letter of the law, establish only the meaning of the normative legal act, which the lawmaking body enshrined in it at the time of the publication of the act. That is why normative legal acts cannot, through interpretation, adapt to the changing economic, social, political, cultural internal and external conditions of public life.\\n\\nIt is proved that the essence of the dynamic theoretical approach lies in the fact that the subject of legal interpretation adapts the normative legal act to the changes that occur in various social relations. It was found that there is a contradiction between the dynamic and static approaches in legal interpretation, which is reflected in the traditionally called objective and subjective theories of interpretation. According to the subjective theory, the purpose of legal interpretation is to establish the «will of the legislator», and according to the objective theory – to establish the «will of the law». It has been substantiated that the essence of the activity approach is that interpretation is considered as a special kind of legal activity aimed at understanding and clarifying the content of legal texts.\\n\\nThe authors of this article point out that in order to establish the true nature of legal interpretation, the methodological foundations of the study should be presented much broader and more diverse, and not be limited only to traditional approaches. When studying it, a comprehensive, integrative approach is needed, which, based on the relevance of interdisciplinary relationships, would include logical, language (linguistic), philosophical, sociological, psychological, axiological (value), ethical, legal, historical, economic, political, mathematical and other substantiation of legal interpretation.\\n\\nKeywords: diversity, theoretical approach, legal interpretation, interpretive practice, integrative approach\",\"PeriodicalId\":359905,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"THE INTERPRETATION OF LAW: FROM THE THEORY TO THE PRACTICE\",\"volume\":\"30 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1900-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"THE INTERPRETATION OF LAW: FROM THE THEORY TO THE PRACTICE\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.33663/2524-017x-2021-12-17\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"THE INTERPRETATION OF LAW: FROM THE THEORY TO THE PRACTICE","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.33663/2524-017x-2021-12-17","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

本文探讨了法律解释的各种理论方法。人们已经确定,法律解释方法的多样性是由于这一现象起源的性质的复杂性,后非古典科学发展的条件,以及最近比较主义范式的影响,该范式假定法律研究中的意见和思想的多元性。研究发现,在现代科学中,对法律解释本质的传统理论途径有四种。已经确定,第一种方法的内容是通过若干类别在法律解释学的框架内揭示出来的。第二种方法(形式上的教条主义或静态的)的本质表现为这样一个事实,即解释的主体必须严格和严格地遵循法律的文字,只确立规范性法律行为的含义,立法机构在法案公布时将其庄严载入其中。这就是规范性法律行为不能通过解释来适应公共生活中不断变化的经济、社会、政治、文化内部和外部条件的原因。事实证明,动态理论方法的本质在于法律解释主体对规范性法律行为进行调整,以适应各种社会关系发生的变化。研究发现,在法律解释中存在着动态解释和静态解释的矛盾,这种矛盾体现在传统的客观解释理论和主观解释理论上。根据主观理论,法律解释的目的是确立“立法者的意志”;根据客观理论,法律解释的目的是确立“法律的意志”。实践证明,活动方法的实质是将解释视为一种旨在理解和澄清法律文本内容的特殊法律活动。本文的作者指出,为了确立法律解释的真正本质,研究的方法论基础应该更加广泛和多样化,而不仅仅局限于传统的方法。在研究它时,需要一种全面、综合的方法,这种方法基于跨学科关系的相关性,将包括逻辑、语言(语言学)、哲学、社会学、心理学、价值论(价值)、伦理、法律、历史、经济、政治、数学和其他法律解释的实证。关键词:多样性,理论途径,法律解释,解释实践,综合途径
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Variety of theoretical approaches to legal interpretation
The article explores the variety of theoretical approaches to legal interpretation. It has been determined that the variety of approaches to legal interpretation is due to the complexity of the nature of the origin of this phenomenon, the conditions for the development of post-non-classical science, and the recent influence of the paradigm of comparism, which assumes pluralism of opinions and ideas in legal research. It was found that in modern science there are four traditional theoretical approaches to the essence of legal interpretation. It has been determined that the content of the first approach is revealed within the framework of legal hermeneutics through a number of categories. The essence of the second approach (formal dogmatic or static) is expressed in the fact that the subject of interpretation must strictly and rigorously follow the letter of the law, establish only the meaning of the normative legal act, which the lawmaking body enshrined in it at the time of the publication of the act. That is why normative legal acts cannot, through interpretation, adapt to the changing economic, social, political, cultural internal and external conditions of public life. It is proved that the essence of the dynamic theoretical approach lies in the fact that the subject of legal interpretation adapts the normative legal act to the changes that occur in various social relations. It was found that there is a contradiction between the dynamic and static approaches in legal interpretation, which is reflected in the traditionally called objective and subjective theories of interpretation. According to the subjective theory, the purpose of legal interpretation is to establish the «will of the legislator», and according to the objective theory – to establish the «will of the law». It has been substantiated that the essence of the activity approach is that interpretation is considered as a special kind of legal activity aimed at understanding and clarifying the content of legal texts. The authors of this article point out that in order to establish the true nature of legal interpretation, the methodological foundations of the study should be presented much broader and more diverse, and not be limited only to traditional approaches. When studying it, a comprehensive, integrative approach is needed, which, based on the relevance of interdisciplinary relationships, would include logical, language (linguistic), philosophical, sociological, psychological, axiological (value), ethical, legal, historical, economic, political, mathematical and other substantiation of legal interpretation. Keywords: diversity, theoretical approach, legal interpretation, interpretive practice, integrative approach
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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