Система права и система законодательства

Abstract: The currency of the research consists in the necessity if rethinking of the notion of culture in Russian contemporary thought in order to present more adequately the process of development of culture in a future. The paper aims to elucidate political origins of the movement of Proletarian culture that play the leading role in a creation of a new conception of culture. As a materials were used documents and archives, scientific paper of Russian and foreign researchers. As a maim method was used problematicanalytical reconstruction, explored in the framework of an enactive approach that allows to envelop the subject in its evolvement and to concentrate on concrete practical situations of its realization. Such reconstruction permits to accomplish the original interpretation of the problem. The authors focus in the pre-history of the movement. Analyzing the social-political context of the origin of the movement, the authors come to the conclusion about artificially created necessity of political enlightenment of the society by the revolutionaries. The paper demonstrates how agents of proletarian working circles manipulate by the public opinion of working class. As a result, the paper shows the process of formation the ideology of cultural movement revolutionary period and evaluates significance of ideological function in its realization. The authors produce critical evaluation of the history of the movement in original judgment about political grounding of culture.

Abstract: INTRODUCTION To date, the science of administrative law has not formed a consensus and has not developed a unified position regarding the concepts of “administrative procedure” and “administrative process”. The scientific discussion about the concept and content of these concepts has been going on for decades. To a greater extent, this dispute is more doctrinal, but in the context of the process of European integration and administrative reform, it acquires practical significance. The current situation is explained by the following reasons: firstly, emasculating the original meaning of the concept of “administrative process” as a judicial process based on a dispute about the law between a citizen and the state, which has generated a number of theoretical problems in science regarding the administrative process 1 , secondly, the differences among scientists are due to uncertainty about the relationship and scope of these concepts as a result of the “narrow” and “broad” concept of the administrative process, which leads to a mixed understanding and hinders the development of a unified approach, thirdly, the imperfection of the administrative and procedural legislation and the lack of legislation on the administrative procedure, and how consequence of the lack of fixing these concepts at the legislative level, which creates legal uncertainty. Bearing in mind that the legal science of “terminology” is attached great importance, since it is based on legislation and enforcement activities of public authorities, it is therefore important at the stage of the study to give due consideration to the question of the relationship between the concepts being studied. Each of them should have strictly defined “conceptually meaningful boundaries”, especially if the problem is at the stage of initial development at the legislative level (we mean the procedure), when the terminological confusion is especially unacceptable, which can lead to further endless discussions, and in practice ‒ additional difficulties.

Abstract: The article is based on the interconnection of the systemic method of cognition of legal phenomena, thespecifics of the legal “augmented” reality and the categories of the general, special and singular. Consistencyin law manifests itself in the process of ascent from the abstract to the concrete — from extremely generallegal phenomena and concepts to individual legal phenomena and concepts. The dialectic of the general,the particular and the individual is also based on this. The general rule of law receives a specification in thesystemic nature of positive law, which, in turn, is reflected in the elements of positive law. General conceptsof the elements of the system of law, for example, branches of law, on the one hand, are universal for theconcepts of special phenomena within the framework of branch sciences, on the other hand, due to the lawsof the categories of general, particular and individual, they subordinate the meanings of these concepts.Sectoral concepts should be meaningfully fit into general theoretical ones, in principle they cannot disagreewith them, otherwise they will not be related as general and special. Ignoring the dialectics of the general,the particular and the individual, as the logic of existence and development inherent in closed systems, canlead to a distorted reflection of reality and defects in legal regulation.

Abstract: The currency of the research consists in the necessity if rethinking of the notion of culture in Russian contemporary thought in order to present more adequately the process of development of culture in a future. The paper aims to elucidate political origins of the movement of Proletarian culture that play the leading role in a creation of a new conception of culture. As a materials were used documents and archives, scientific paper of Russian and foreign researchers. As a maim method was used problematicanalytical reconstruction, explored in the framework of an enactive approach that allows to envelop the subject in its evolvement and to concentrate on concrete practical situations of its realization. Such reconstruction permits to accomplish the original interpretation of the problem. The authors focus in the pre-history of the movement. Analyzing the social-political context of the origin of the movement, the authors come to the conclusion about artificially created necessity of political enlightenment of the society by the revolutionaries. The paper demonstrates how agents of proletarian working circles manipulate by the public opinion of working class. As a result, the paper shows the process of formation the ideology of cultural movement revolutionary period and evaluates significance of ideological function in its realization. The authors produce critical evaluation of the history of the movement in original judgment about political grounding of culture.

Abstract: INTRODUCTION To date, the science of administrative law has not formed a consensus and has not developed a unified position regarding the concepts of “administrative procedure” and “administrative process”. The scientific discussion about the concept and content of these concepts has been going on for decades. To a greater extent, this dispute is more doctrinal, but in the context of the process of European integration and administrative reform, it acquires practical significance. The current situation is explained by the following reasons: firstly, emasculating the original meaning of the concept of “administrative process” as a judicial process based on a dispute about the law between a citizen and the state, which has generated a number of theoretical problems in science regarding the administrative process 1 , secondly, the differences among scientists are due to uncertainty about the relationship and scope of these concepts as a result of the “narrow” and “broad” concept of the administrative process, which leads to a mixed understanding and hinders the development of a unified approach, thirdly, the imperfection of the administrative and procedural legislation and the lack of legislation on the administrative procedure, and how consequence of the lack of fixing these concepts at the legislative level, which creates legal uncertainty. Bearing in mind that the legal science of “terminology” is attached great importance, since it is based on legislation and enforcement activities of public authorities, it is therefore important at the stage of the study to give due consideration to the question of the relationship between the concepts being studied. Each of them should have strictly defined “conceptually meaningful boundaries”, especially if the problem is at the stage of initial development at the legislative level (we mean the procedure), when the terminological confusion is especially unacceptable, which can lead to further endless discussions, and in practice ‒ additional difficulties.

Abstract: The article is based on the interconnection of the systemic method of cognition of legal phenomena, thespecifics of the legal “augmented” reality and the categories of the general, special and singular. Consistencyin law manifests itself in the process of ascent from the abstract to the concrete — from extremely generallegal phenomena and concepts to individual legal phenomena and concepts. The dialectic of the general,the particular and the individual is also based on this. The general rule of law receives a specification in thesystemic nature of positive law, which, in turn, is reflected in the elements of positive law. General conceptsof the elements of the system of law, for example, branches of law, on the one hand, are universal for theconcepts of special phenomena within the framework of branch sciences, on the other hand, due to the lawsof the categories of general, particular and individual, they subordinate the meanings of these concepts.Sectoral concepts should be meaningfully fit into general theoretical ones, in principle they cannot disagreewith them, otherwise they will not be related as general and special. Ignoring the dialectics of the general,the particular and the individual, as the logic of existence and development inherent in closed systems, canlead to a distorted reflection of reality and defects in legal regulation.