Ogleznev_V_V__Surovtsev_V_A_Analiticheskaya_filosofia_yuridicheskiy_yazyk_i_filosofia_prava
.pdf
»
. , .
,
2016
340.124
87.3
37
., .
37 , -. – : . , 2016. – 236 .
ISBN 978-5-7511-2380-2
DOI 10.17223/978-5-7511-2380-2
-
-
.
, -
. :
-
? -
?
?
-
.
, ,
.
340.124
87.3
. .
» 2015 .
-2149.2014.6)
ISBN 978-5-7511-2380-2 |
© ., ., 2016 |
TOMSK STATE UNIVERSITY
VITALY V. OGLEZNEV & VALERIY A. SUROVTSEV
ANALYTICAL PHILOSOPHY,
LEGAL LANGUAGE
AND PHILOSOPHY OF LAW
Tomsk State University Publishing House,
2016
Vitaly V. Ogleznev & Valeriy A. Surovtsev
Analytical philosophy, legal language and philosophy of law. – Tomsk: Tomsk State University Publishing House, 2016. – 236 .
ISBN 978-5-7511-2380-2
DOI 10.17223/978-5-7511-2380-2
Contemporary analytical philosophy of law is a relatively new trend in legal theory studies. The purpose of the book is to find out the essence of conceptual changes of legal theory under the influence of English-language analytical philosophy. The general issues of that book are: What novel content appears in legal theory thanks to the analytical methods of legal language studies? How does analytical philosophy correlate with conventional approaches to the legal theory? To what extent are these novel methods applicable to the traditional issues of philosophy of law?
The translations of some key publications in the field of analytical philosophy of law are presented in the addendum.
Readership: Academics and advanced students of jurisprudence and the philosophy of law; philosophers of language; academics and advanced students of philosophy.
© Vitaly V. Ogleznev & Valeriy A. Surovtsev, 2016
|
|
|
|
., .) ................................................................. |
7 |
1. : ..................................... |
13 |
1.1. : |
|
.)...................................................................................... |
13 |
1.2. |
|
.)...................................................................................... |
24 |
1.3.per genus proximum et differentiam specificam
., .).............................................................. |
31 |
2. ......................................................... |
46 |
2.1. , |
|
., .).............................................................. |
46 |
2.2. : . |
|
.)....................................................................................... |
57 |
2.3.. versus . :
.)....................................................................................... |
67 |
2.4. |
|
.)....................................................................................... |
74 |
3. : ..................... |
88 |
3.1. : |
|
|
|
., .).............................................................. |
88 |
3.2. : |
|
.)....................................................................................... |
105 |
3.3. , , |
|
.)....................................................................................... |
115 |
4. ........................... |
126 |
4.1. . |
|
., .).............................................................. |
126 |
4.2. |
|
., .).............................................................. |
142 |
5. ........................... |
148 |
|
5.1. |
|
|
|
., .) ............................................................. |
148 |
5.2. |
|
|
|
., .).............................................................. |
166 |
: .................................................................................................... |
178 |
|
1. |
. |
|
|
............................................................................ |
178 |
2. |
. XX : |
|
|
............................................................... |
186 |
3. |
. |
|
|
(1945–1952).................................................................. |
213 |
4. |
. : |
|
|
................................................................ |
226 |
-
, -
. -
: -
?
?
?
?
XX
, .
,
, -
1. , « »
, ,
. ,
, . , . ,
. , . , . ., -
« », -
, « », « » « -
», – , ,
, , -
. . , ,
. ,
-
, -
,
1 Hall J. Analytic Philosophy and Jurisprudence // Ethics. 1966. Vol. 77, 1. P. 14.
8 |
|
. , , ,
, ,
, ,
, ,
« »,
,
2.
,
,
, -
-
,
, ,
.
, XX
( -
)
,
« -»3. . ,
4, : « [ -
] -
, ;
[ ]
-
»5. , -
, -
. , , «
, ‘ ’ – , -
, -
, -
. -
2Hart H.L.A. Philosophy of Law and Jurisprudence in Britain (1945 1952) // The American Journal of Comparative Law. 1953. Vol. 2, . 3. P. 364. ( .
). . « ».
3. //hole. . 2010. 4. . 149–165.
4.: . . .
: . , 2012.
5 Hart H.L.A. Op. cit. 1953. P. 357–358.
|
9 |
-
– , -
»6.
-
, ,
, , .
, -
7. , -
. . -
, -
, , ,
, -.
.
-
. , -
, -
. , -
( , ,
), , -
.
, –
, , ,
.
, -
,
XX . , -
-
, -
,
,
6 Bix B. On Philosophy in American Law: Analytical Legal Philosophy / On Philosophy in American Law, ed. Francis J. Mootz III. Cambridge University Press, 2009. P. 99. (
. ). .
. 7 . -
( ). ., 1986. . 7.
10 |
|
.
, -
, -
. , ,
,
, -
, .
, -
: , -
.
« : -
» -
, ,
-
. -
per genus proximum et differentiam specificam -
, -
.
« » -
-
, -
. , ,
-
, -
.
« : -
»
,
. –
. -
,
XIX .
« -
» -
. -