Koval Nataliia
postgraduate student
Private Higher Educational Institution University of King Danylo,
natalya25koval@gmail.com
Anotation. National general theoretical jurisprudenceis experiencing a complex and
contradictory period of its history. On the one hand, the collapse of totalitarianism
andmethodological monism in the study of law and other legal phenomena, provided ample
opportunities for the renewal of domestic law science, overcoming its long isolation from the
European and world culture and legal theory. On the other hand, the transition from
methodological monism to worldview methodological pluralism has led to complication of the
process of perception of legal phenomena, one of the consequences of which was the eclectic
combination of heterogeneous worldview principles and ideas from Marxist to neoliberal, which
are badly interconnected. This creates inconsistencies of contradiction, which often do not meet
the basic requirements for scientific theories.
Before starting to studying, it is advisable in scientific research to decide
onmethodological platforms, which enable to effectively implementthem, reflect its results with
the adequately current conditions, and indicate the ways of their implementation in practice.
The complexity lies, in fact, in the urgent need to develop completely new concepts of
activity. Science, which should be formed on sound, theoretical and methodological basis, should
playan important role in the development of such concepts.
Thus, in order to determine the genuinenessof the created scientific knowledge, one should
decide on the understanding of methodological platforms, which are fundamental to any study.
In this regard, one should speak not about the crisis of domestic theoretical legal
conscience and general theoretical jurisprudence, but "about the diseases of its growth", or rather,
modernization. The construction of its integral, internally consistent system, the final release
from the previous dogmatic representations - this is the case, apparently,of not a single
generation of legal professional. Therefore,making no pretense to universality and conceptual
completeness of the directions of modern law science, thementioned problems are caused,firstly,
by peculiarities of the modern understanding of law as an instrument of justice in transient
conditions of transformation of society; secondly, the plurality of legal cultures, the processes of
geopolitical changes in general theoretical jurisprudence and the need for their adequate
comprehension; thirdly, the search for ways to combine universal and unique in the development
of domestic and world theoretical and legal thinking.
Keywords: National general theoretical jurisprudenceis experiencing a complex and
contradictory period of its history. On the one hand, the collapse of totalitarianism
andmethodological monism in the study of law and other legal phenomena, provided ample
opportunities for the renewal of domestic law science, overcoming its long isolation from the
European and world culture and legal theory. On the other hand, the transition from
methodological monism to worldview methodological pluralism has led to complication of the
process of perception of legal phenomena, one of the consequences of which was the eclectic
combination of heterogeneous worldview principles and ideas from Marxist to neoliberal, which
are badly interconnected. This creates inconsistencies of contradiction, which often do not meet
the basic requirements for scientific theories.
Before starting to studying, it is advisable in scientific research to decide
onmethodological platforms, which enable to effectively implementthem, reflect its results with
the adequately current conditions, and indicate the ways of their implementation in practice.
The complexity lies, in fact, in the urgent need to develop completely new concepts of
activity. Science, which should be formed on sound, theoretical and methodological basis, should
playan important role in the development of such concepts.
Thus, in order to determine the genuinenessof the created scientific knowledge, one should
decide on the understanding of methodological platforms, which are fundamental to any study.
In this regard, one should speak not about the crisis of domestic theoretical legal
conscience and general theoretical jurisprudence, but "about the diseases of its growth", or rather,
modernization. The construction of its integral, internally consistent system, the final release
from the previous dogmatic representations - this is the case, apparently,of not a single
generation of legal professional. Therefore,making no pretense to universality and conceptual
completeness of the directions of modern law science, thementioned problems are caused,firstly,
by peculiarities of the modern understanding of law as an instrument of justice in transient
conditions of transformation of society; secondly, the plurality of legal cultures, the processes of
geopolitical changes in general theoretical jurisprudence and the need for their adequate
comprehension; thirdly, the search for ways to combine universal and unique in the development
of domestic and world theoretical and legal thinking.