Legitimizing Force of Great Narratives in the XXI century

Abstract

This article is devoted to the study of the concept of «great narratives» and their implications for legal philosophy and legal science in the 21st century. The author analyzes the concept of great narratives and the concomitant ideas of unity and totality, given by J.-F. Lyotard, and compares them with similar ideas put forward by other philosophers, in particular, Ch. Perelman. The author also makes an attempt to investigate the argumentation system proposed by J.-F. Lyotard in return for the use of great narratives and evaluate this system in connection with its application in legal science. Noting the problematic approach of Lyotard, within the framework of which, when we refuse the «terror» of great narratives, we find ourselves in a situation where there are no criteria and norms for making decisions, the author of this work acknowledges the contribution of this approach to the development of legal argumentation. This system rests on the important premise that homogeneity and integrity of society is a (dangerous) illusion, which should be eliminated, and in return it is necessary to recognize the right of different groups within society and even separate individuals to be different and to create their own narratives of justice. Of course, this approach is complex and full of contradictions, and the thoughtless introduction of proposals made by J.-F. Lyotard in the legal practice in its original form would be an unjustified step leading to arbitrariness and disorder. However, it seems that some of the provisions of his theory ( for example, the uniqueness of each dispute, the need for argumentation, etc.) could be used in making legal decisions, like the main premises of his theory.