Autors

In this article, the authors analyze unity as a fundamental principle of Platonic philosophy from in relation to the foundations of modern mathematics, identifying its inherent limitations. They explore the ancient natural philosophical sources and the historical context of the Platonic understanding of number, which shaped the Platonic concept of the One and the Many, revealing its problematic aspects. These issues were subsequently preserved in Christianized Platonism (notably in the Areopagitica and its dependent traditions), which provided an orthodox theology with its classical theoretical framework. The authors believe that this analysis complements (1) Heidegger's critique of Platonic ontology; (2) post-metaphysical discourse in theology; and (3) the tradition of employing mathematical analysis to address theological and philosophical problems, particularly with Anglo-American analytical philosophy. The purpose of this work is to characterize the fundamental problem of cosmogony based on the Platonic concept presented in the dialogue Parmenides through mathematical analysis. The specific objectives are: 1) to prove the relevance and significance of the mathematical approach to analyzing classical European philosophical systems, including their theological implications; 2) to provide a brief overview of the Platonic concept of the Absolute; 3) to identify problematic aspects of this concept within the context of mathematical foundations; 4) and to examine the Platonic notion of the Absolute concerning the principles of continuity in unity.

Keywords: Plato; platonism; One; Many; number; continuity; Parmenides; philosophy of mathematics

The article is devoted to the exploration of social reflection in the media space. The question about borders of socially meaningful discourse, which produces publicly essential conditions for social reflections is raised. Basic dichotomy of private and public in the frame of new media-format and the status of public talk in modern forms of mass communication is analyzed. The article describes both classic philosophical conceptions of private and public (H. Arendt), of  public sphere (J. Habermas), of individual and public (Z. Baumann), of the phenomenon of talk (M. Heidegger) and contemporary studies of communication in media space (N. Luhmann, M. Castells, N. Bolz, R. Sennett, etc.). The purpose of the article is to argue that classic models of publicity do not make sense in contemporary forms of social reflection. However, more importantly is that the new forms of social reflections can be represented only in a random discussion without connotation. Consumer continues to be the subject of media space, but not the creator of socially important ideas.

Keywords: communication, discussion, media space, private and public, social reflection.

The article considers main tendencies of confessional situation in the regions of the Russian Federation, which result from migration of ethnic Muslims. The analysis is based on the field research, which was carried out in Perm Krai. The authors define major factors, which influence migration processes; the regions, which deliver migrants; the ways newcomers use to gain their own niche in new socio-cultural space; the strategy of social behavior. The most significant aspects of changes in religious behavior and cult practice of local believers are highlighted. The potential of innovations and their introduction to local population and traditional culture is specified. The ways of adaptation of newcomers to public life are defined, such as: informing the community, interfaith activities, organization of psychological support service for migrants.

Keywords: migratory processes, Islam, Muslims, interaction of cultures.

The 1993 Constitution of the Russian Federation laid down new trends in the development of local self-government. The Constitutional Court plays an important role in protecting the constitutional right to exercise local self-government, in the formation and transformation of the Russian model of local self-government. The article discusses some of the legal positions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, which were based on the norms of the Constitution of the Russian Federation until the 2020 amendments. It is shown that the decisions in many cases that were considered by the Constitutional Court and touched upon various problems of local self-government used discussion among judges, which is reflected in a number of opinions and dissenting opinions. In the Opinion of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation of March 16, 2020 No. 1-Z, the Constitutional Court concluded that the amendments to the Constitution are consistent with chapters 1, 2 and 9 of the Constitution. However, the article  shows that the amendments to the Constitution continue the tendency to centralize not only the state, but the entire system of public authority in Russia. A number of amendments to the Constitution emasculate many of the legal positions previously formulated by the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation. Accordingly, the constitutional foundations of the Russian model of local self-government will undergo significant changes. So far, one can only predict how this will affect the change in the legal positions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation.

Keywords: Constitution of the Russian Federation; Law on Amendments to the Constitution; local self-government; legal positions of the Constitutional Court; dissenting opinions of judges of the Constitutional Court; territorial settlement principle; formation of local self-government bodies

Sovereignty is seen as one of the hallmarks of a state, however globalization and integration processes challenge state sovereignty. First of all, they challenge the economic component of state sovereignty – the so-called economic sovereignty. Many states, while de jure sovereign, do not have full sovereignty de facto. This problem is also relevant for Russia: it remains highly dependent on imports of high-tech products, on foreign components, foreign standards, foreign software products and payment systems. Although measures to address these problems were proclaimed, their effectiveness is doubtful. It seems that the ongoing financial and economic policy and some changes in Russian legislation (in particular, tax legislation) don’t contribute to genuine import substitution. Moreover they create difficulties for it. Of course, political scientists, economists and philosophers argue whether the value of state sovereignty is preserved in the modern world. But for lawyers the answer is obvious: sovereignty is one of the key principles of both international law and the constitutional law of most states. However, lawyers sometimes “do not notice” the threats to sovereignty, believing that sovereignty is a formal concept, not an actual one. According to many lawyers, the transfer of the powers of the state to supranational unions is not a limitation of sovereignty. It seems that such an approach only camouflages the problem, and does not contribute to its solution. Moreover, foreign experience indicates the possibility of using different terminology (“transfer of powers”, “transfer of sovereign rights”, “restriction of sovereignty”, etc.) for similar phenomena. The article draws attention to some of the threats to economic sovereignty that Russia has faced, and which are associated with public debt, various international obligations. New sanctions in connection with a change in the geopolitical situation in 2022 actualize this issue: dependence on imports of critically important products, on foreign software; disconnection Russia from the SWIFT system; termination of Visa and Mastercard payment systems in Russia; freezing of Russian reserves, etc. The authors of the article conclude that although one of the arguments in favor of the constitutional reform of 2020 was the protection of state sovereignty, a number of problems in this part remain unresolved. No constitutional restrictions on external borrowing have been introduced. Complicated procedures for the conclusion of those international agreements that may lead to limitation of the economic sovereignty of the state have not been established; other mechanisms for ensuring state sovereignty, which have already been tested in foreign experience, have not been used. Therefore, the relevance of further constitutional reform in terms of ensuring economic sovereignty remains 

Keywords: sovereignty; economic sovereignty; globalization; integration; import substitution; constitutional reform 2020; provisional application of international treaties

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

The urgency of this research arises from several unexamined aspects in modern criminal law, including the theoretical and practical need to clarify the various areas developed within the criminal law doctrine. This article aims to identify an independent historical school of criminal law in Russia, rooted in the theories by Friedrich Carl von Savigny and other Western scholars, and to delineate its three modifications: historicaldogmatic, historical-philosophical, and historical-comparative. It also seeks to identify key representatives of these areas and their perspectives on the emergence and evolution of criminal law, in particular, regarding their influence on legislation , such as the Penal Code of 1845 and the Criminal Code of 1903.

The first part of this research serves as a propaedeutic introduction to series dedicated to exploring the impact of the historical school of law on Russian criminal law doctrine in the 19th century. It describes this school and outlines the views of its proponents and opponents relevant to this trend in the Russian criminal law. The articles published in the journal State and Law (2025. № 1 and 2) are dedicated to Ivan E. Neiman, one of the founders of the historical school of Russian criminal law, and his prominent students both at the Imperial Kazan University and at the University of Dorpat.

The general purpose of this study is to elucidate how the historical school of law influenced 19th-century Russian criminologists' ideas and their reflection in legislation, particularly in the Code of Penal and Correctional Punishment of 1845 and the Criminal Code of 1903. The specific aim is to demonstrate how this school formed the conceptual foundation for Russian criminal law doctrine during that period. The theoretical framework for this research is grounded in dialectical materialism, supplemented by logical and historical-dogmatic methods.

This article traces the genesis of the historical school of law, examining its causes – including the so-called codification dispute – and describes the views of its most prominent figures: Gustave Hugo, Friedrich Carl von Savigny, and Georg Friedrich Puchta. These scholars recognized “the spirit of the people” as a source of law while critiquing Anton Friedrich Justus Thibaut. The assessments by Rudolf von Ihering, Otto Friedrich von Gierke, and other notable scholars are also presented. Furthermore, it explores how representatives from Russian legal history – such as Pavel I. Novgorodtsev, Sergei A. Muromtsev, and Nilkolai A. Kareev – perceived this school’s significance for both Russian law generally and criminal law specifically. Contemporary legal scholars' perspectives on the essence of discussions between historical and philosophical schools are also included (e.g., Valentina V. Emikh).

Main Conclusions: 1) Characterizing the historical school as foundational to Russia's 19th-century criminal law doctrine necessitates focusing on its key concept – the national spirit – which reflects national legal consciousness while contrasting it with natural law theories. 2) The division within this general theory into branches helps explain the emergence of three relatively independent areas within Russian criminal law thought: historical-dogmatic, historical-philosophical, and historical-comparative. 3) Analyzing criminal law doctrine requires consideration of Puchta's views on universal legal history to highlight differences between his ideas and those held by Russian criminologists aligned with the historical school. 4) The study of philosophical trends in Russian criminal law should be contextualized within fundamental differences among representatives of the historical school itself as well as between this theory and philosophical schools.

Keywords: criminal law; schools; historical school of law; conceptual foundations; Savigny; Puchta; the importance of historical school of law; historical school in Russian literature; discussion between historical and philosophical schools of law

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