Constitutional law science

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru/

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW SCIENCE

Bysaga Yu.M.

Byelov D.M.

Lenger Ya.I.

Constitutional law as a science - a system of scientifically based knowledge, ideas, theories, concepts of constitutional and legal relations and the constitutional and legal practice. Constitutional law as jurisprudence has its specialty code: 12.00.02 - constitutional law, municipal law.

Formally, the science of constitutional law is not present by laws, however, a large number of books, articles, monographs, reports. The constitutional law science studies the effect of constitutional law, its implementation rules and principles, the laws of development, formulating practical advices to improve standards of constitutional law and constitutional relationships. An important component of constitutional law science is the study the paradigm of constitutionalism.

Today, democratic governance in the countryjust do not conceivable without such categories as constitutionalism. He reveals essential side democratic governance and its functional and practical aspects. Practical implementation of the regime of constitutionalism is impossible without compliance with the relevant principles, requirements and appropriate instruments.

Constitutionalism: theoretical approaches

The research process of genesis, evolution of constitutionalism as a science and its theoretical components are updated wide range of philosophical, epistemological and methodological issues related to the knowledge of general laws and structures of development of scientific knowledge. Powerful contribution to the development of this theoretical issues was conducted within the modem philosophy of science.

We said, in particular, the methodological value of concepts of science development of world famous philosophers of the twentieth century: K. Popper [1], T. Kuhn [2], I. Lakatos [3], P. Feyerabend [4], K. Polanyi [5] and others that are not only developed but also significantly upgraded the traditional scientific understanding of this area. Therefore, it is no exaggeration to say that today, without consideration of analytical and scientific contributions can not do any serious work on the methodology of constitutional law sciences.

A holistic vision of constitutionalism, followed to understand and explain the science of constitutional law based on certain conceptual precepts, which approximate to a number of basic units and diverge of long duration of its effect - the urgent requirement for the science of constitutional law, the answer to her desire to know the nature of their activities, through it - to know the nature of yourself. A possible variant of this review can serve as a paradigm approach.

This situation posit before constitutional doctrine and practice is quite complex and extremely important task: to develop the necessary theoretical, methodological and practical approaches to ensure system integrity, self-reliance and dynamism of the Constitution, on the one hand, and on the other - ensure the adequacy of the dynamics of social practice constitutionally established functional balance [6, p. 59].

Paradigm as the category of public science

One of the specific features of legal knowledge is external preconceived of the paradigm. If other humanities themselves define a subject, specific consideration (and the certainty of this is largely a consequence of the value orientation of the researcher, the selection of priorities of public life on the basis of ideological priorities), European law past few centuries has some issue, purposes of legal proceedings are determined entirely practical tasks, and in fact any serious theoretical difference has direct practical way [7, p. 34].

T. Kuhn in his Structure of Scientific Revolutions (1962) used the term “paradigm” to refer to the conceptual frameworks and/or worldviews of various scientific communities [2]. For T. Kuhn, a scientific paradigm includes models - like the planetary model of atoms - and theories, concepts, knowledge, assumptions, and values. The concept of a scientific paradigm was essential to Kuhn's argument that the history of science is characterized by conceptual frameworks giving way to new ones during what he called scientific revolutions [9, p. 88].

T. Kuhn believed that during periods of “normal science” scientists work within the same paradigm. Scientific communication and work proceeds relatively smoothly until anomalies occur or a new theory or model is proposed which requires understanding traditional scientific concepts in new ways, and which rejects old assumptions and replaces them with new ones[10, p. 51].

A paradigm of a scientific revolution in T. Kuhn's sense would be the Copernican revolution. The old model of the Earth at the center of a god's creation was replaced with a model that put Earth as one of several planets orbiting our sun. Eventually, circular orbits, which represented perfection and a god's design for the heavens in the old worldview, would be reluctantly replaced by elliptical orbits. Galileo would find other “imperfections” in the heavens, such as craters on the moon.

For T. Kuhn, scientific revolutions occur during those periods where at least two paradigms co-exist, one traditional and at least one new. The paradigms are incommensurable, as are the concepts used to understand and explain basic facts and beliefs. The two groups live in different worlds. He called the movement from the old to a new paradigm a paradigm shift.

Whether T. Kuhn was right or wrong about the history of science - and he has plenty of critics - his notions of a paradigm and a paradigm shift have had enormous influence outside the history of science. In many ways, how T. Kuhn is understood and applied is analogous to how Darwin's conception of natural selection has been misunderstood and applied outside evolutionary biology. For a paradigm of this type of misapplication, see the Skeptic's Dictionary entry onneuro-linguistic programming.

One of the more common applications of the terms paradigm and paradigm shift is to mean “traditional way of thinking” vs. “new way of thinking”. Some New Age thinkers seem to think that paradigms can be created by individuals or groups who consciously set out to create them. They seem to mean by “paradigm” nothing more than “a set of personal beliefs”, e. g., Essays on Creating Sacred Relationships: The Next Step to a New Paradigm by Sondra Ray and Handbook for the New Paradigm from Benevelent Energies. Many of the New Age selfhelp promoters base their approaches on the notion that one's current paradigm is holding them back and what they need to do is create a new paradigm (set of beliefs, priorities, assumptions, values, goals, etc.) for themselves that will allow them to break through, etc. [10, p. 58-59].

The paradigm is also the prevailing pattern of thought in a discipline or part of a discipline [11, p. 60]. The paradigm provides rules about the type of problem which faces investigators and the way they should go about solving them. For constitutional law, for example, the paradigm would be referred to when questions such as “what is constitutional law?”; “what are the legitimate areas of investigation for constitutional law?”; “how should constitutional law go about their investigations?” are asked. Perhaps the most powerful paradigm for Western thinkers has been the “scientific method”.

Paradigm also had a narrower meaning: the so-called theory, which was taken as a model (method) resolution of a certain type of task or problem. In the methodology of science, the term coined G. Bergman, understanding him some common principles and standards of methodological research [21].

Today, the term “paradigm” is widely used in the scientific literature (although in legal academic literature, this term is very difficult to find - D.B.). The original application it was in the fields of natural science, but has become quite common in the field of human knowledge in a variety of interpretations, sometimes quite contradictory. This fact is obviously related to the objective difficulties in the accuracy of the transformation of the concepts of technical arguments in the humanitarian sector. Any parallels here does not lead to an unambiguous interpretation. The reason for this, in our view, lies in the specificity of technical concepts and vagueness of humanitarian concepts. Should be mentioned the multiplicity of approaches, such as concepts (categories) as legal ideology, objective truth, justice, the legal system, the principle of law, civil society, legal, etc.

The paradigm in jurisprudence

In jurisprudence the term “paradigm” use recently. In our opinion, it is caused by the lack of understanding the semantic meaning of the term relation to legal science. Another reason we see in numerous improper use of its practice in other humanities. In many publications, the same phenomenon in the same context call paradigm or the concept or idea, etc. [8, p. 11].

In legal scientific literature can be found the following definition of the paradigm of law. M. Kuparashvili believe that the paradigm is the sum of the theoretical and methodological provisions adopted by the scientific community as the standard for both direct studies and their interpretation, ordering, classification and evaluation [15, p. 94]. F. Rayanov talking about the paradigm of law, defines them as initial positions of the law [16, p. 28].

A. Ovchinnikov offers the following definition of the legal paradigm: “a set of theoretical and methodological and axiological constants in the activities of legal thinking, which determines the development of legal science and practice on the basis of an understanding of the law, meaning law dominant in a particular historical and cultural point oflegal thinking” [17, p. 161].

V. Malakhov uses the term “in a broader sense than it is usually use in the scientific literature: “the most significant in the meaning of the term paradigm -scientist says - “to be a matrix of intellectual and spiritual understanding of reality, to be the epitome of the features of mental culture specific of nations and epochs, to represent the unity of intellectual and sensory perception of the world” [18, p. 154].

The examples of the use of the term “paradigm” in law does not define its epistemology. In our opinion, the term “paradigm” in the legal interpretation is one of those philosophical positions, which, according to V. Sirih, can be considered scientific only after a comprehensive study [19, p. 129].

The introduction of the term “paradigm of constitutionalism” because of his metaphor requires caution, a similar use in other legal science terminology notation borrowed from other sciences (“legal matter”, “energy of law”, “law entropy”, etc.). However, as noted S. Alekseev, to such terminological innovations have to go, “because the other way is not possible to mark something new and specific, that is revealed as a result of scientific research” [20, p. 7].

Thus, the paradigm of constitutionalism is the quintessential constitutional and legal knowledge at this level reached its integrity and interdependence of individual areas and structural components, and crystallized sociocultural functionality of this sphere of knowledge. With substantial part of the paradigm of constitutionalism is based on a synthesis of the main approaches to solving their problem field in all its aspects, with the exception of internal problems epistemological nature. Thus, the paradigm of constitutionalism in concentrated form reflects the social importance of constitutionalism for the operation and development of constitutional law, and more broadly - as the legal aspect of society.

Conclusions

Today, the term “paradigm” is used in the sense developed by American scientist T. Kuhn in “The Structure of Scientific Revolutions”. The purpose of Kuhn's work is to describe at least a schematic concept of science that arising from the historical approach to the study of the research activities. The scientist developed the concept of the progression of science, based on its history. He believed that science develops as a result of scientific revolutions, based on a paradigm.

We offer the following definition the paradigm of constitutionalism - a set of ideal pieces of constitutional reality (concepts, values, principles, ideas and practices) that are divided by society at the present stage of development of the state and form a definite vision of constitutionalism, and specific areas of solving the problem of constitutionalism.

paradigm legal constitutionalism

Literature

1. Поппер К. Логика и рост научного знания / К. Поппер. -М.: Прогресс, 1983. -211 с.

2. Кун Т. Структура научных революций / Т. Кун. - М.: Прогресс, 1977. - 304 с.

3. Лакатош И. Избранные произведения по философии и методологии науки / И. Лакатош. - М.: Академический Проект, 2008. - 551 с.

4. Фейерабенд П. Избранные труды по методологии науки / пер. с англ, и нем. А.Л. Никифорова ; общ. ред. и вступ, от. И.С. Нарского. - М.: Прогресс, 1986. - 542 с.

5. Поланьи К. Великаятрансформация/К. Поланьи.-М., 1961, -429 с.

6. Белов Д.М. Парадигма конституціоналізму: теоретичні питання / Д.М. Белов // Науковий вісник Ужгородського національного університету. Серія «Право». - 2012. - Вип. 18. --С. 57-60.

7. Белов Д.М. Парадигма українського конституціоналізму: правова сутність та зміст/Д.М. Белов//Вісник Запорізького національного університету. Серія «Юридичні науки». -2012. -№4, - Ч. І. - С. 32-35.

8. Шаканов В.В. Правовые парадигмы: дис. канд. юрид. наук: спец. 12.00.01. - «теория и история права и государства; история правовых учений» / В.В. Шаканов. - М.: РГБ, 2006. - 193 с.

9. Kuhn Thomas S. The Road Since Structure: Philosophical Essays, 1970-1993, With anAutobiographical Interview, eds. Jim Conant and John Haugeland, University of Chicago Press, 2000.

10. Kuhn Thomas S. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. 3rd ed. University of Chicago, 1996.

11. Masterman Margaret «The Nature of a Paradigm», pp. 59-89 in Imre Lakatos and Alan Musgrave. Criticism and the Growth ofKnowledge. - Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1970.

12. Белов Д.М. Парадигма українського конституціоналізму / Д.М. Белов. - В. Березний: РК «Євростандарт», 2011. - 400 с.

13. Белов Д.М., Ленгер Я.І. Парадигма конституціоналізму як категорія конституційного права України / Д.М. Белов, Я.І. Ленгер II Матеріали міжнародної науково-практичної конференції «Реформування законодавства України та розвиток суспільних відносин в Україні: питання взаємодії» (м. Ужгород, 30-31 березня 2013 р.). - С. 40-42.

14. Белов Д.М. Парадигма українського конституціоналізму: теоретико-правові засади / Д.М. Белов, Я.І. Ленгер II Матеріали міжнародної науково-практичної конференції «Держава і громадянське суспільство: стан та перспективи розвитку» (14листопада 2013 р.). - Ірпінь: Нац. ун-т ДПС України, 2013. - С. 7-9.

15. Купарашвили М.Д. Парадигма мышления и системы ценностей / М.Д. Купарашвили //Философские науки. -2003. -№8.-С. 94-105.

16. Раянов Ф.М. Правовая организация общественной жизни: теория и практика/Ф.М. Раянов // Государство и право. -2004.-№12.-С. 5-9.

17. Овчинников А.И. Юридическая герменевтика как правопонимание / А.И. Овчинников II Правоведение. - 2004. - №4.-С. 160-169.

18. Малахов В.П. Философия права: учеб, пособие / В.П. Малахов. - М.: Академ. Проект ; Екатеринбург: Деловая книга, 2002. - 448 с.

19. Сырых В.М. Логические основания общей теории права: в 2 т. / В.М. Сырых. - 2-е изд., стер. - М.: Юстицинформ, 2004. -Т.1: Элементный состав. - 528 с.; Т. 2: Логика правового исследования (Как написать диссертацию). - 560 с.

20. Алексеев С.С. Право и правовая система / С.С. Алексеев // Правоведение. - 1980. -№1.-С. 5-9.

21. Syed Tazkirlnam. Constitutionalism - changing paradigm / Electronic copy available at: http://ssrn.com/abstractH681530.

Размещено на Allbest.ru