Метаантропологічні парадигми антиномії філософії права

Abstract

In the antinomian theory, a significant place is given to the anthropological features of a person. Such a statement takes place because human beings in law often, even sometimes unquestionably, focus on the fact that the main thing for them is the bodily nature of existence. Then all attention is directed to the fact that bodily behavior decides the righteousness or non-righteousness of life, and antinations are sought in this theory, which does not lead to a deontological result. Why does this state occur? The fact is that a person is not only a physical, natural person, but also a supernatural one. This thesis in a godless state was reduced to a simple understanding of man as a part of nature, not all of nature – body, soul, spirit: This is needed by earthly civilization, and not by others. Such positivist ideologies denied for at least two centuries that positive law has the right for existence, but the natural is not, not to mention the supernatural. Therefore, the human soul and spirit were mentioned only as figments of bourgeois theory. At present, the meta-anthropological features are not confidently included in the philosophical and legal science, as signs of former artificial influences on the development of real anthropological reasons. The identification of the real reasons requires the subject’s right to the essence of metaanthropology. On the one hand, the body, soul and spirit are separate, autonomous components, elements of a person. Each of these elements has its own laws of development. There are bodily laws, mental laws, and spiritual laws. If there are laws, then they act according to their imperatives. On the other hand, the body, soul, and spirit are a unified whole of a person, where every part, every organ must obey the mind. In the case when the mind works weakly or not ontologically, then the effectiveness of the autonomous laws of the body, soul, and spirit create either contradictions or insufficient potential opportunities for regulation. Such a weakened metaanthropological human organism produces antinomies. Then it follows that a person is not confident in his behavior – various options for his actions are either true or not true, ontological or non-ontological. In any case, they do not lead to the truth. For this, it is necessary to take into account the deep essence of law, which harmonizes the internal meta-anthropological laws of man, his metaphysical properties. Subjects of law pay the main attention to the implementation of positive law. Therefore, there is an unjustified tendency to neglect natural and supernatural law, their regulatory impulses.