Историко-философский (объективно-научный) метод юриспруденции С.А. Муромцева

Abstract

The object of research is the methodological program of Sergey Muromtsev, on the basis of which a program for transforming legal science was developed. The aim of the article is to characterize the formation of Muromtsev's methodology, its sources and composite elements, the impact on the definition of the subject and objectives of legal science and its separation in the industry. Theoretical and methodological attitudes of Muromtsev were formed at the time when the need for reforms was certainly recognized in Russian jurisprudence. The historical and legal basis of the concept was made up of studies on the history and dogma of Roman law. Muromtsev's conception was built on the basis of a critical analysis of the main lines of development of German jurisprudence - Hegelianism, the historical school, taking into account the practical direction and active use of the works of R. Iering. The conception was formed on the basis of the German school of jurisprudence and later supplemented and improved based on the positivist philosophy itself. The transition from “historical-philosophical” to “objective-scientific” research reflected Muromtsev's greater attention to the Anglo-French positivism (in particular, the logic of J. St. Mill). From the point of view of positivist methodology, Muromtsev considered the addition and verification of the results of the historical-comparative study with a priori theses about the nature of man and society, the addition of induction by deduction from psychological and sociological laws. Muromtsev's psychologism was focused primarily on the explanation of the processes of legal education. Muromtsev can be considered a supporter of a multifactorial explanation of the origin of law. However, the immediate (final) source of law, according to his theory, is jurisprudence in the broadest sense of the word (legal thinking). The psychological characteristics of society and lawyers are a factor that determines the specifics of the law in a particular period of a particular society. This conclusion can serve as a guideline in sociological research of the legal education process even today. The distinction between science, politics, and dogma is based on a radical revision of the subject, tasks (goals), and methodology of jurisprudence from the standpoint of positivism and historicism. As a result, Muromtsev proposed to distinguish between dogma in the strict sense (study of current law in order to apply it in practice) and a new general dogmatic theory (“a systematic presentation of the principles of the current law of any country and any time”). It is not a study of laws in the scientific sense of the word, but it can be a preparatory stage for induction and deduction, which should be done by jurisprudence as a part of social science. The merit of Muromtsev is not the “invention” of new methodological techniques, but a consistent application of the positivist methodology to the study of legal material.