From methodological essentialism to totalitarianism: unfinished dispute Karl Popper with Platon  Ethics and politics of Platon

The article represents a reply to PhD in Law A.V. Stovba’s critical analysis published in “Pravovedenie”. The author has defended the thesis that there is doubt as to whether the application of new terminology and innovative research methods borrowed from Hard Sciences and Philosophy and propagated by the representatives of the so called Non-classical Philosophy of law has brought positive results in jurisprudence.

Keywords

theory of state and law, Philosophy of Law, methodology, non-classical Philosophy of Law, temporal theory of law

Received

09.09.2020

Publication date

18.12.2020

Number of characters

37358

Cite

GOST	Martyshin O. From “methodological essentialism” to totalitarianism: unfinished dispute Karl Popper with Platon Ethics and politics of Platon // Gosudarstvo i pravo – 2020. – Issue 12 C. 35-44 [Electronic resource]. URL: https://gospravo-journal.ru/S102694520012729-2-1 (circulation date: 09.09.2024). DOI: 10.31857/S102694520012729-2
MLA	Martyshin, Orest "From “methodological essentialism” to totalitarianism: unfinished dispute Karl Popper with Platon Ethics and politics of Platon." Gosudarstvo i pravo 12 (2020):35-44. DOI: 10.31857/S102694520012729-2
APA	Martyshin O. (2020). From “methodological essentialism” to totalitarianism: unfinished dispute Karl Popper with Platon Ethics and politics of Platon. Gosudarstvo i pravo (12), pp.35-44 DOI: 10.31857/S102694520012729-2

100 rub.

When subscribing to an article or issue, the user can download PDF, evaluate the publication or contact the author. Need to register.

Number of purchasers: 0, views: 743

Readers community rating: votes 0

1. Mamardashvili M.K., Solovyov E. Yu., Shvyrev V.S. Classical and modern bourgeois philosophy (Experience of epistemological comparison) // Questions of philosophy. 1970. No. 12; 1971. No. 4 (in Russ.).

2. Non-classical Philosophy of Law: questions and answers. Kharkov, 2013. P. 111, 128, 130, 131, 133, 135, 153 - 155, 157, 169, 172, 253, 256 (in Russ.).

3. Pozner R.A. Frontiers of the theory of law. M., 2017. P. 158 (in Russ.).

4. Sokal N., Brikmon Zh. Intellectual tricks. Critique of modern postmodern philosophy. M., 2002. P. 154, 124 (in Russ.).

5. Stovba A.V. On the features of philosophical and legal methodology // Jurisprudence. 2017. No. 4. P. 91 - 98, 100 (in Russ.).

6. Timoshina E.V. Classical and post-classical legal understanding as styles of philosophical and legal thinking // Anthology of post-classical law / under the General editorship of I.L. Chestnov. SPb., 2016. 221, 234, 235, 284, 291, 292 (in Russ.).

7. Khokhlov E.B. Legal chimeras as a problem of modern Russian legal science // Jurisprudence. 2004. No. 1. P. 5, 6 (in Russ.).