Bryanik Nadezda
The article attempts to substantiate the formation of structuralist methodology in logic at the beginning of the 20th century. This development aligns with the broader trend in non-classical science, whose main subsystems identify structural and static laws grounded in structuralist method. Accordingly, the author understands logical structuralism as the position that regards this methodology as fundamental to the advancement of modern logic. The adoption of structuralist methodology became possible due to a profound transformation in the subject matter of logic – a shift which many experts consider a revolution in the field. This transformation marked a move away from conceptual analysis to the analysis of language itself. Logical structuralism, therefore, emphasizes the “technology” of this method, which was reflected in the works of French thinkers, such as Roland Barthes and Jilles Deleuze, and domestic scholars like Vladimir Y. Propp, who developed structuralist approach. Within this framework, the linguistic structures of the logic model are seen as isomorphic and internally identical to ontological structures. Terms such as logical structure, logical framework, logical features, and logical skeleton capture the isomorphic nature of these ontological entities and the regularities they exhibit. The potential of the structuralist methodology in logic remains far from fully realized. This approach could serve as a unifying tool for the expanding field of knowledge, much like it did in mathematics at the beginning of the 20th century. In addition, the stages of structuralist research – initially developed within major scientific subsystems – progress from statics and synchrony to dynamics and diachrony. This evolution suggests that logic too may follow a similar trajectory in the future.
Keywords: structuralism; structuralist methodology; logic; logical structures; ontological structures; structural laws; Bertrand Russell; Rudolf Carnap; Ludwig Wittgenstein; Guido Küng; Georg Henrik von Wright
Shaveko Nikolai
The main characteristics of Russian religious philosophy of law are examined within the context of the modern Russian state’s policy aimed at preserving and strengthening traditional Russian spiritual and moral values. The policy is interpreted as a manifestation of a “conservative turn” in domestic politics while still maintaining the liberal “core” of the Constitution of the Russian Federation. The article demonstrates that Russian legal philosophy – most of which can be classified as “religious” – cannot serve as a theoretical foundation for such a policy, since conservatism clearly prevails over liberalism in it, which does not align with Russia’s current legal system. Furthermore it cannot function as a source of content for specific traditional values within the legal ideal, since the conceptualizations of such ideal historically were not oriented towards the interests of a multi-national, multi-religious civil nation. As a result, they fail to comply with the guidelines of the present Russian government. Given these considerations, it can be concluded that the tradition, which the current Russian government suggests the Russian people as a diverse, multinational and not entirely religious population, should rely on to reinforce civil unity, can only be “reinvented” through broad public discussions. It cannot be simply sought in the past nor imposed “from the authorities” under the guise of “historical truth”.
Keywords: traditional values; historical truth; conservative liberalism; Orthodoxy; Russian religious philosophy; legal ideal
Yarkeev Aleksey
The article presents a historical and philosophical analysis of the ideological foundations that led to the emergence of the European police state (ger. der Polizeistaat) as a comprehensive and unified project in the 17th and 18th centuries. This project aimed to secure safety, expand state power, and promote the well-being and prosperity of the population through extensive administrative regulation of social life. The contemporary relevance of revisiting the conceptual roots of the police state is linked, among other factors, to the current “conservative turn” occurring both in Russia and in liberal Western societies. This shift involves a renewed emphasis on the necessity and effectiveness of a strong paternalistic state, characterized by large-scale intervention in public affairs. Michel Foucault famously connects the rise of the police state at the dawn of Western biopolitics to the concept of pastoral power. While Foucault’s insights are certainly valuable, his analysis seems to oversimplify the complex transformation of pastoral care into a model of administration. Building on Giorgio Agamben’s paradigmatic ontology, which combines historical, hermeneutic and philosophical archaeology approaches, this article argues that the idea of a police state, whose development parallels the history of the state itself since antiquity, originates at the intersection of two evolving forms of Western governance. One draws from the ancient Greek model of biopolitical pastoral care, while the other is rooted in the pastoral ministry of institutional Christianity. The emergence of refined political rationality centered on the concept of state interest (lat. ratio status) in the late 16th and early 17th centuries marked the beginning of a process in which these two pastoral rationalities (lat. ratio pastoralis) became closely intertwined. This fusion ultimately gave rise, during the 17th and 18th centuries to police and bio-power as secular manifestations of the pastoral power exercised by the modern state.
Keywords: police state; police; public administration; biopolitics; pastoral power; pastorate; population
Nersesyants Anna
The article asserts that Russian historiography of political and legal thought has extensively examined ancient mythology in its coverage of classical myths, but has neglected earlier mythological systems that significantly influenced ancient traditions. The author seeks to address this gap, which hinders legal science from fully understanding the foundational origins of legal consciousness in human development. The analysis begins by exploring the concept of myth, emphasizing its etymological roots to demonstrate its intrinsic connection between the words “myth” and “thought”, which is crucial for constructing a historiography of political and legal thought in contrast to the historiography of political and legal doctrines. Furthermore, the study highlights the importance of research into ancient myths, due to developing a comprehensive Russian historiography of political and legal thought. This is illustrated through historical evolution of key mythological concepts, such as the ancient Indian Rita and Zoroastrian Arta, which later transformed into Greek Arete, and subsequently into the Roman Virtus. The article underscores the value of hermeneutic methodology in comparative studies of early legal concepts across mythological systems, offering deeper insights into the civilizational distinctions of legal development worldwide – particularly in analyzing the unique legal cultures of the East and West.
Keywords: political and legal thought; legal consciousness; historiography; myth; ontology of law; Rita; Arete; Virtus
Chirninov Aldar
The article examines various typologies of legal arguments, focusing on those developed by prominent scholars such as Philip Bobbitt, Richard Fallon Jr., Duncan Kennedy, Robert Alexy, Neil McCormick, Wilson R. Huhn, and András Jakab. It analyzes the foundations of these typologies, assessing their applicability in explaining the argumentative patterns found in constitutional discourse. The author compares and contrasts the approaches taken by these scholars, examining their strengths and weaknesses, as well as exploring the relationships between different types of arguments. Despite the fact that they can be formally ordered by abstract significance for the legal system, the article acknowledges that it is difficult to establish a strict hierarchy among them in advance, as the strength of each argument type will depend on the specific social and legal context. After summarizing the existing typologies of arguments used in legal discourse, the author proposes his own typology of constitutional arguments that meets the requirements of methodological reductionism and takes into account the features of constitutional review. The article emphasizes the modal nature of constitutional arguments and argues that the legitimacy of each type of argument depends on the fundamental values defended and promoted by that type. It also helps to better understand the relationship between argumentation and interpretation, as it distinguishes between interpretative and non-interpretative arguments depending on the efforts made to understand the meaning of legal norms. All the studied typologies are aimed at identifying the meanings embedded in normative texts. Based on the analysis of the different types of arguments and the characteristics of constitutional review, the author identifies four main categories of constitutional arguments: textual arguments, intentional arguments, arguments based on consistency, and pragmatic arguments.
Keywords: typology of arguments; constitutional argumentation; constitutional justice; constitutional discourse; constitutionality; judicial review
Belosludtsev Oleg
The article centers on the theory of constitutional disharmony developed by Gary J. Jacobsohn. The first section examines the concept of constitutional disharmony itself and its significance in explaining constitutional transformations. From Gary J. Jacobsohn’s perspective, constitutional disharmonies serve as an internal drivers for the development of constitutional identity. He distinguishes two types of disharmony: internal, which includes contradictions within the constitution; and external, which encompasses disparities between constitutional norms and social or political realities. His approach combines elements of classical dialectics with legal realism, viewing contradictions as a driving mechanism for constitutional evolution. Jacobsohn’s theory aligns with realistic perspectives on law, emphasizing the importance of analyzing contradictions and gaps in positive law. The article provides specific examples of different types of disharmony, with particular attention to conflicts at the level of “Social Order vs. Constitution”. This analysis addresses a crucial question in constitutionalism: how well does a given constitutional model align with its social environment? A critical assessment reveals that various factors – such as the complexity of state structures and processes of international and European integration – can intensify both internal and external constitutional disharmonies. The second part of the article explores the place and role of constitutional disharmony within the context of Russian constitutional reforms. It includes an analysis of mass consciousness through data from World Values Survey, which enhances the relevance and the applicability of the findings to contemporary realities. This work proposes a useful approach to studying constitutional changes by integrating legal analysis with insights from sociology and political science, opening new avenues for understanding the nature and dynamics of constitutional systems.
Keywords: constitutional disharmony; constitutional dynamics; constitutional values; incrementalism; constitution and social order; disharmonies in the Constitution of the Russian Federation
Malikov Sergey
, Chuchaev Aleksandr
This article, which serves as a continuation of the work The Historical School of Law: Reflection of Ideas in Russian Criminal Law (Part One)2, is motivated by two key imperatives. First, it seeks to address gaps in the history of criminal law scholarship caused by its fragmentation and the exclusion of certain schools of thought – particularly the historical school of criminal law in Russia – from academic discourse. Second, it aims to reintroduce the works of 18th century legal scholars who laid the foundations of law, and criminal law in particular. Such reintegration will enable a more profound understanding of contemporary criminal law theory, its philosophical roots, and the unique national characteristics of Russian legal doctrine. The study aims to trace the emergence of the historical-comparative approach in Russian criminal law theory as a component of the Russian historical school of criminal law – itself shaped by Friedrich Carl von Savigny’s historical school of law. It further seeks to identify key contributors to this approach, examine their scholarly legacy, and demonstrate its enduring relevance today. The article provides brief biographical details of the forerunner of the historical-comparative direction in the Russian historical school of criminal law and characterizes the criminallegal views of Alexey Ya. Polenov and the founder of diachronic comparative law, Semyon E. Desnitsky, as well as Imperial Kharkov University professors Ilya F. Timkovsky and Capiton Ph. Mikhalovsky. Their works not only reflect the ideas of these scholars but also advanced them further in both theoretical and applied dimensions. The study’s key conclusions are as follows: 1) The historical-comparative direction in Russian criminal law is distinguished by its unique conceptual foundations. Emerging from Savigny’s school, it incorporated both Russia’s established traditions of historical legal studies and the scholarly legacy of Polenov and, especially, Desnitsky. 2) Polenov, convinced that each nation’s law is a unique one, shaped by diverse circumstances, advocated for examining foreign legal systems. However, he firmly opposed the direct transplantation of alien legal elements into Russian law. 3) Desnitsky, a polymath scholar, developed methodology of comparative jurisprudence, he approached history as the study of legal institutions across nations in their development to “uncover the laws of their evolution”. His progressive criminallegal ideas on individual criminal behavior, jus puniendi, differentiated legal responsibility, equality before criminal law, penal justice, capital punishment, remain relevant to this day. 4) Limited in volume, the scholarly contributions of Timkovsky and Mikhalovsky within the historical-comparative doctrine of criminal law are no less significant. They attest to the continuity of Desnitsky’s school and its influence on the formation and development of the historical-comparative direction in Russian criminal-legal thought.
Keywords: historical school of law; historical school of Russian criminal law; historical-comparative approach; Alexey Ya. Polenov; Semyon E. Desnitsky; Ilya F. Timkovsky; Capiton Ph. Mikhalovsky; scholarly legacy; contemporary diachronic comparative studies
Korsakov Konstantin
The study undertakes an examination of the philosophical and legal conceptions on criminal punishment as articulated by eminent philosophers and jurists from Antiquity through the zenith of German idealism. Employing historical-comparative, retrospective and analytical approaches, it traces the evolution of penal theories within their respective socio-political and intellectual environments. The analysis emphasizes the emergence of sophisticated philosophical reflections on the purpose, objectives and essence of criminal punishment in ancient Greek pre-Socratic thought, contextualizing them within mythological worldviews and prevailing ethical paradigms of the time. Particular emphasis is placed on the seminal contributions of Plato and Aristotle, whose doctrines have exerted enduring influence upon subsequent philosophical discourse and legislative praxis. The study elucidates the attribution of foundational status to Plato by proponents of both classical penological traditions and scientific positivism. Furthermore, it delineates distinctive features of medieval penological doctrines as formulated by representatives of patristics, scholastic and Thomistic schools. It also highlights the progressive ideas on criminal punishment introduced during Enlightenment and the early Modern period by notable educators, encyclopedists, utopian thinkers and pioneers of scientific utilitarianism. A critical analysis of the penal theories formulated by German classical philosophers – namely Immanuel Kant, Georg W. F. Hegel and Johann G. Fichte – is presented, with particular attention to refuting those prevailing interpretations that erroneously associate their absolute theories with the lex talionis or view them as philosophical justification for archaic retributive principles. In conclusion the article contends that, notwithstanding their historical origins, the absolute theories of punishment retain significant relevance in contemporary theoretical debates. Amid intensified controversies surrounding the dichotomy of absolute and utilitarian principles, as well as the intentions and components of criminal punishment, these theories provide robust logical frameworks that continue to inform and challenge prevailing penological paradigms.
Keywords: criminal punishment; philosophy of punishment; penology; theories of punishment; essence of punishment; grounds of criminal punishment; purposes of criminal punishment; absolute concepts of punishment; utilitarian concepts of punishment
Vinogradova Elena
, Rattur Maria
The state structure, political regime, and form of government, collectively determine the organizational and functional foundations of state power. Studying their legal nature remains a research imperative with enduring scholarly significance. The evolution of territorial state organization is contextually shaped by the development of constitutional-legal doctrines that define the modern political and legal order. Constructing a historiographic framework for political-legal knowledge facilitates a refined analysis of the principles underlying state formation, in particular, legitimism – an institution seldom examined in legal scholarship. Addressing this gap predetermines several key tasks, including the redefinition of chronological parameters and the identification of influential figures in politicallegal thought, both domestic and international. Utilizing rigorously verified sources – previously inaccessible for systematic study – this research reveals previously overlooked dimensions of Russia's impact on global political and legal processes. Certain aspects of this influence stem from the principle of legitimism, manifest in various constitutional and legal institutions. Consequently, examining the interplay between legitimism and constitutionalism yields significant scholarly results. This study employs a retrospective analysis of Swiss statehood formation in the early 19th century, to scrutinize the principle of legitimism. It explores Switzerland’s constitutional development, with particular attention to Russia's role. The study indicates that key features of Switzerland's state-legal identity – its confederate structure and direct democracy – were preserved under Alexander I of Russia’s influence, while armed neutrality emerged through a Russian-proposed resolution. The contemporary relevance of comparing Swiss and Russian constitutional provisions arises from broader global transformations in political and legal models of statehood, exemplified by the 2020 amendments to the Constitution of the Russian Federation, and the imperative of their legitimization. As states reassess the interplay between domestic and foreign policy, research of this nature assumes heightened relevance and scholarly importance.
Keywords: statehood; federation; confederation; Switzerland; historiographic analysis; identity; Congress of Vienna; Russian Empire; legitimism
Filippova Natalya
, Kolos Yana
The article examines the legal aspects of institutionalizing public associations established with the participation of the Russian state, analyzing their legal nature, and role in the relationship between the state and the “third sector”. It examines the historical development of Russian legislation in this field, its unique national characteristics, and recent regulatory changes. The study summarizes the practical aspects of registering such associations in the Ministry of Justice’s Public Associations Registry, including state involvement in their formation and activities, such as initiation, establishment, governance representation, and support measures. A comparative analysis of legislation and enforcement practices across post-Soviet republics identifies three approaches to institutionalizing state-involved associations: 1) prohibiting state participation in their creation (The Republic of Kazakhstan); 2) integrating them into state-structures as form of non-profit organization (The Republic of Belarus); 3) maintaining their public association status while allowing state participation in their formation and goal-setting (The Russian Federation). The article also examines debates in Russian legal scholarship regarding the legal nature of state-affiliated public associations. The authors argue for the necessity of a federal law systematically regulating their unique legal status. They propose that such associations’ mobilizing function – distinguishing them from both traditional public associations and socially oriented non-profits – should be central to future legislation. Adopting such a law could resolve inconsistences in their registration and classification within the Registry of Public Associations.
Keywords: public authority system; public associations; non-profit organizations; public associations with state involvement; public-state associations; state-public associations