Legal system: can one speak about secondary modeling system in law?

Abstract

The essay examines possible affinities betweenTartu-Moscow school of cultural semiotics andlegal semiotics. The introduction briefly setsout a historical dimension of the ideologicalintegration of Tartu-Moscow semiotics (inbroader context Tartu semiotics) into thegeneral framework of legal semiotics. It arguesthat there was a `real' historical mediationbetween the members of Tartu-Moscow schoolsemiotic circle and legal scholars from Tartu.The acceptance of such a bridging link betweenlegal academic community and semioticians couldgive further impetus to construction of aspecial model of `Tartu legal semiotics'. The development of Tartu-Moscow `legalsemiotics' could be illustrated by theimplementation of a special explanatoryframework, which provide insights into the wayTartu semiotics wedded to a legal positivistphilosophy. Particular importance of such aframework (model of legal semiotics) rest onfact that the academic ideology of Tartu-Moscowschool reflects and conforms to all thehistorical peculiarities of the Soviet epoch(these peculiarities should be always kept inmind). In order to adopt Tartu-Moscow semioticsto legal semiotics, semiotic theory ofTartu-Moscow school must be recast in terms oflegal semiotics The dissemination of semioticstudies in late Soviet epoch enabled them to belinked to various theoretical enquiries intothe domain of legal methodology, ontology andepistemology. This essay puts a specialemphasis on the notion of `secondary modelingsystem' as a natural pattern for `systemacity'within the universe of law. However, in orderto understand the semiotic value of `legalsystem' it is necessary to have recourse toother systems. Therefore, this paper examinesdifferent system dimensions of law: fromgeneral notion of system and theory ofautopoetic system to sign systems. The possible synthesis of logical, sociologicaland semiotic approaches to the system of lawopens a wider multidisciplinary perspective;moreover the need for multidisciplinarysynthesis is pertinent to contemporaryphilosophical concerns. The main analyticaltask of essay is to provide an answer to aquestion of whether core semiotic concept of a`secondary modeling system' (amongst otherconcepts like `boundary', `semiosphere',`culture' and `text') is capable of enrichingand clarifying legal philosophy in a widerperspective and the semiotic account of law inparticular. A positive answer to the questionwill favor the further tight integration ofTartu-Moscow semiotic concepts into the domainof legal semiotics.