Reasons for bifurcation of the legal discourse basis (synergetic and philosophical-linguistic approaches)

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru/

REASONS FOR BIFURCATION OF THE LEGAL DISCOURSE BASIS (SYNERGETIC AND PHILOSOPHICAL-LINGUISTIC APPROACHES)

Yu.V. Kharchenko, S.P. Kharchenko

Volodymyr Vynnychenko Central Ukrainian State Pedagogical University

Abstract

The key task of this study is the conceptualization of the phenomenon of legal discourse, as well as, the analysis of bifurcation trends that affect the basic directions of its development. As a result of the study, it was confirmed that the sustainable development of global legal systems is subject to random deviations due to the virtualization of law and the semantization of legal discourse. Two or more new states of legal systems become unstable. Virtual law and real law "overlap" each other, and in such a legal reality separate protocols operate and the impression is created that such a model of legal discourse is dominating. At the same time, the mechanisms of self-regulation of the legal system support it in two states, and the transition to one or another trajectory becomes difficult. The conclusions demonstrate that the foundations of legal discourse are inevitably transformed, developed, violated, taking into account the peculiarities of social development. This is reflected most expressively in the language of law. The reformatting of the legal system is due to the infinitely complex combination of the influence of the subjects of law on it and the quality of their legal actions.

Keywords: bifurcation, legal discourse, legal system, legal action.

Аннотация

Причины бифуркации основ правового дискурса (синергетический и философско-лингвистический подходы). Харченко Ю.В., Харченко С.П.

Целью данного исследования является концептуализация феномена правового дискурса, а также анализ бифуркационных тенденций, влияющих на базовые направления его развития. Основными методологическими инструментами в данном исследовании стали синергетический и философско-лингвистический подходы. В результате исследования подтверждено, что устойчивое развитие глобальных правовых систем подвергается случайным отклонениям по причине виртуализации права, семантизации правового дискурса. Неустойчивыми становятся два или несколько новых состояний правовых систем. Виртуальное право и реальное право «накладываются» друг на друга. В такой правовой реальности действуют отдельные протоколы и создается впечатление того, что такая модель правового дискурса начинает доминировать. При этом механизмы саморегулирования правовой системы поддерживают ее в двух состояниях и переход на ту или иную траекторию становится затруднительным. В результате основы правового дискурса с неизбежностью трансформируются с учетом особенностей социального развития. Наиболее выразительно это отражается в языке права. Переформатирование правовой системы обусловлено бесконечно сложным сочетанием влияний на нее субъектов права и качества их правовых действий.

Ключевые слова: бифуркация, правовой дискурс, правовая система, правовое действие.

legal discourse bifurcation reformatting

Анотація

Причини біфуркації основ правового дискурсу (синергетичний і філософсько-лінгвістичний підходи). Харченко Ю.В., Харченко С.П.

Вступ. У сучасному глобальному світі - в його політичній, економічній, культурній, соціальній сферах, а також у міжнародних відносинах - спостерігається деяке порушення динаміки, що знаходить своє відображення в численних дискусіях про верховенство права. Тенденції невизначеності виникають у такий період розвитку міжнародно-правової системи або окремої національної правової системи, коли попередній стабільний, лінійний та передбачуваний шлях розвитку цих систем стає неможливим. Метою дослідження є концептуалізація феномена правового дискурсу, а також аналіз біфуркаційних тенденцій, що впливають на базові напрямки його розвитку. Методологєю дослідження в даному дослідженні виступають синергетичний і філософсько- лінгвістичний підходи. Результати дослідження. Сталий розвиток глобальних правових систем піддається випадковим відхиленням з причини віртуалізації права та семантизації правового дискурсу. Нестійкими стають два або кілька нових станів правових систем. Віртуальне право і реальне право «накладаються», у результаті чого починають діяти окремі протоколи. Створюється враження, що в сучасний період така модель правового дискурсу починає домінувати. При цьому механізми саморегулювання правової системи підтримують її в подвійному стані, а перехід на ту чи іншу траєкторію стає проблематичним. Обговорення. У філософсько-правових знаннях в умовах перехідного періоду розвитку сучасного суспільства трансформується значення категорій "право", "правовий дискурс", "правова система", "юридична дія". У той же час ефективно використовується мова синергетики, яка описує сутність невизначеності та хаосу. У висновках продемонстровано, що основи правового дискурсу з неминучістю трансформуються, розвиваються, порушуються з урахуванням особливостей соціального розвитку. Найбільш виразно це відбивається в мові права. Переформатування правової системи обумовлене нескінченно складним поєднанням впливів на неї суб'єктів права і якості їхніх правових дій.

Ключові слова: біфуркація, правовий дискурс, правова система, правова дія.

Introduction

The term "discourse" (fr. Latin "discursus" - reasoning, argument) has deeply penetrated into the categorical- conceptual apparatus of modern philosophical science. The philosophy of language as a fundamental direction of the philosophical knowledge defines the term "discourse" as its basic one. Comparative linguistics balancing on the verge of the philosophy of language and linguistics actualizes such philosophical and linguistic directions as semantics, semiotics, pragmatics, which, in turn, regard "discourse" as "language in language."

In modern philosophy of law, a similar trend can also be traced. "Discourse" is considered to be the key unit of communication between representatives of a particular legal community. Thus, the terms "legal discourse", "judicial discourse" penetrate into the language of philosophy of law. In our opinion, "legal discourse" can be understood as a specific legislative language in all its diversity.

We understand "legal discourse" as such, which indicates linguistic dynamics, a particular practice of language use, corresponding to a specific linguistic sphere (for example, the sphere of administrative law, the sphere of international law). Moreover, "legal discourse" develops a special legal vocabulary. "Legal discourse" is subject to strict restrictive rules of legislative semantics, as well as the rules of grammar, syntax, punctuation, and is aimed at fulfilling procedural requirements.

In the political, economic, cultural, social spheres of the modern global world, as well as in the international relations - there is some violation of the dynamics. These bifurcation tendencies are reflected, first of all, in the language of international law, in numerous discussions about what a "rule of law" is, held on various international scientific platforms.

Bifurcation tendencies arise in such a period of development of the international legal system or a separate national legal system, when the previous stable, linear, and predictable path of development of these systems becomes impossible. At a certain critical moment, the instability of global legal institutions grows, as a result the entire system of international law is rebuilt and follows one of the possible paths of further development, that is, a certain phase transition occurs.

It can be argued with caution that the critical moment for the global world has not yet arrived, but the beginning of a discussion about the purpose and role of international law, the importance of legal institutions and the threat of their destruction actualizes the key problems associated with this.

The aim and tasks. Consequently, the key aim of this study is to conceptualize the phenomenon of legal discourse, as well as to analyze bifurcation trends that affect the basic directions of its development.

Research methods

The main methodological tools in this study are synergistic and philosophical-linguistic approaches. The synergistic approach is used by modern philosophy of law to describe and designate: qualitative restructuring of the legal system; significant changes in its parameters; the metamorphosis of various objects of law; new vectors of development of legal systems; the active position of subjects of law.

The theory of bifurcations of dynamical systems was first developed by mathematicians A. Poincare and A. Andronov. The main philosophical and methodological ideas of chaos theory were further developed in the theory of catastrophes, proposed, in turn, by the mathematician R. Thom. The theory of catastrophes, using mathematical methods, describes abrupt qualitative changes - transitions to a state of deterministic chaos, phase transitions, selforganization, and jumps in the behavior of nonlinear dynamic systems evolving in time. The understanding of synergetic processes will be incomplete without the theory of catastrophes. An important advantage of this theory is that it can describe situations both "quantitatively" and "qualitatively" (Арнольд, 1985: 9). In the theory of catastrophes, bifurcation is represented as a jump-like qualitative restructuring of the system with a smooth change in parameters. Up to the point of bifurcation, the system has one path of development; its behavior is completely predictable. The onset of bifurcation is a catastrophic leap, a conflict breakdown, a node of interaction between a case and an external constraint, between oscillations and irreversibility (Арнольд, 1985: 9).

Current events in politics, economics, and medicine are continuously demonstrating bifurcation trends. Thus, even the most universal and stable legal systems can enter a critical state. E. Gerasimova proved that it is very easy to cross the "line of what is permitted" in search of imaginary freedom, but the consequences will not be long in coming (Герасимова, 2020: 7). For example, Britain's exit from the European Union can also be perceived as a transition point from chaos to order, since at the moment of exit a new order begins to take shape, completing the period of development of this legal system with an aggravation. Aggravation occurred in the process of preparing a new treaty between Great Britain and the European Union. The medical problem of vaccination in Europe also reflects crisis trends in European law, domestic rules and legal procedures.

The philosophical-linguistic approach provides for linguistic observation and analysis of the legal language, the allocation of specific linguistic phenomena in legal discourse and their consistent description in terms of their structure and functioning. The description of certain forms of legal discourse in a certain period of its historical development is also carried out.

The contextual analysis is used to study the functional specifics of lexical units of legal discourse and their meanings. In addition, it is also applied for the analysis of legal documents (their fragments, special texts, individual legal provisions). The contextual analysis makes it possible to determine the dependence of the meaning of the lexical unit of legal discourse on the context and to check the contextually determined and contextually independent meanings.

The method of linguistic modeling involves the compilation of models, schemes or samples of lexical units of legal discourse or legal language as a whole (we are talking about structural and functional models of legal language).

S. Grinev-Grinevich and E. Sorokina define the semiotic method as a way of studying the sign properties of lexical units of legal discourse, taking into account the semantic (meaning), pragmatic (usage), syntactic (relations of units within the language system), and recently also evolutionary, morphological (formal-structural), syntagmatic (the relationship of linguistic units in the speech chain) aspects (Гринёв-Гриневич, 2010: 27).

Research results

As we have already noted, modern legal institutions reflect bifurcation moments in the development of existing legal systems. Sustainable development of global legal systems is subject to random deviations due to the virtualization of law, the semantization of legal discourse. More than one or two new states become unstable. The concept of "legal reality" is also being transformed. In our opinion, instability increases if the ontic symmetry of the natural, social, and spiritual worlds is broken, in an immoral society their trivergence is impossible (Kharchenko, 2020: 20). Virtual law and real law are "superimposed" on each other. In such a legal reality, separate protocols operate and it seems that such a model of legal discourse is beginning to dominate. At the same time, the mechanisms of self-regulation of the legal system support it in two states and the transition to one or another trajectory becomes difficult.

O. Dzoban and Y. Melyakova point out to the transformation of the concept of "reality". In their view, it is no longer seen as one-dimensional and linear, but as complex and nonlinear, where different, ontologically independent and autonomous plans of existence coexist, have to interact. Recognition of the polyionic nature of reality is the basis of virtualism and at the same time the theoretical basis of the modern ontology of law. Therefore, the virtual reality of law finds its place among the legal dimensions. The spread of the latter in all spheres of human activity, including law, makes relevant the philosophical understanding of this phenomenon. The virtual reality of law has an interdisciplinary nature and is at the intersection of social philosophy, philosophy of law, the ontology of law and modern legal culture. In addition, the relevance of research in the virtual science of law is due to post-classical trends of liberalization, autonomy, and internalization of law (Дзьобань). As the evolving legal system depends on the parameters of "hypertext", when the latter changes, the behavior of the whole system may change slightly. However, when a parameter passes through a certain critical value, the dynamics of the legal system may undergo a qualitative adjustment. The values of the parameters at which the established modes of motion in legal discourse are rearranged become bifurcation values of the parameter if the subjects of law violate their own prescriptions.

O. Dzoban and Y. Melyakova emphasize that the ontology of virtuality offers the social sciences, including law, a modern conceptual apparatus: fluctuation, navigation, intersubjectivity, intertextuality, hypertext, polynarrative, interiorization, identification, creativity, adaptation. This gives rise to a new style and forms the principles of the ontology of postmodern law. The way of being of the subject of virtual reality is characterized as cocreative, in contrast to the interpretive being of the subject of objective reality (Дзьобань). Virtual legal discourse is becoming dominant in the field of social networks.

The authors noted the unity of theoretical principles of self-development and methods of understanding legal and virtual realities. Synergetically organized hypertext with dynamic content, new criteria of rationality and justice, semantic pluralism reconcile virtuality and law. The cultural heterogeneity, inherent in modern society, determines liberalism in the field of law and defines the postmodernist paradigm in law. Modern theory and practice of liberal law are based on the concept of language. It is the linguistic space of the legal discourse of justice that embodies the logic of virtual reality. The laws of hermeneutic logic have changed: interpretation requires new principles of substantiation, the main of which are relevance and argumentation (Дзьобань). The linguistic space of legal discourse in the logic of virtual reality also simulates situations where participants in the network process have no rights or lose the right to vote. As a result, there is a "crisis", which naturally generates bifurcations.

In this regard, T. Gavronskaya believes that the problem of responsibility is central to the legal discourse, involving clarification of the formal conditions under which the person, as the bearer of social responsibility, can fulfill freely chosen requirements, responsibilities, and tasks, be aware of the consequences of his activities. Beyond these conditions, freedom turns into nihilism, the neglect of other people's interests. The formation of man presupposes the education of a sense of responsibility, which must be realized by a person in any situation related to moral choice, to be realized in certain human actions. Therefore, the problem of social responsibility is inextricably linked with the problem of individual freedom and its boundaries (Гавронская, 2015: 186). Thus, these boundaries should not be defined by the usage of the network community and virtual law.

Discussion

N. Khramtsova defined legal discourse as a phenomenon that has become the subject of reflection in connection with changes in perceptions of the world, human, the criteria for assessing human activity, including the role, place and content of law. In her opinion, the issues of theoretical (methodological) development of legal discourse - speech behavior of subjects of law, study of verbal strategies in legal activity of subjects, interpretation of legal language and its linguistic and psychological aspects, application of discursive analysis to legal texts, texts law enforcement acts in legal science, are becoming more and more actual (Храмцова, 2010: 6). The need to study the phenomenon of legal discourse is also due to the fact that fundamental legal norms are often violated due to various types of expediency associated with the current moment. In particular, it is a question of political expediency. However, such actions are leveling the meaning of law.

N. Khramtsova rightly emphasizes firstly the thinking of a lawyer is unique, and therefore does not resemble the thinking of a worker, farmer, and entrepreneur. Secondly, legal thinking presupposes a certain culture, or, more precisely, the legal culture of a thinking individual, which manifests itself in the results of legal thinking, and in particular in a specific legal discourse. Thirdly, the uniqueness of legal thinking is manifested in the methodological unusualness of methods and means of thinking, the way of thinking, which generates legal discourse. By hypothesizing the connection and interdependence of the lawyer's thinking and legal discourse as a means and at the same time the result of mental work, we thereby reveal the objective preconditions of what we will call "legal discourse" in the future (Храмцова, 2010: 9). The period or moment in the history of the formation of the legal system, when it transforms from one systemic certainty to another, if it reaches a qualitatively different constructive level of its development, can also be called a bifurcation moment. Its qualitative characteristics after reaching the bifurcation point fundamentally change, which leads to a change and improvement of the essence of the system. The mechanism of transformation of the legal system, working in such moments, is associated with the branching of the system trajectory, determined by the presence of competition of attractors. The legal system can also undergo negative transformations.

N. Khramtsova notes that: 1) in the historical aspect (taking into account the evolution of human thinking qualities, as well as the legal thinking) this approach will clarify the genesis of legal thinking, aspects of continuity and novelty in its content and direction; 2) the psychological interpretation of the essence of thinking can be used to the necessary extent as an attempt to explain the legal thinking of human through the features of its subjective world and mental organization; 3) thinking can be considered in terms of methodological analysis, which allows us to develop the ideal essence of legal thinking as a projection of real legal thinking (Храмцова, 2010: 12). Legal discourse is created in a certain semantic field and is designed to convey certain meanings, being aimed at legal communicative actions. The basic criterion of legal discourse is the specific legal language environment in which language constructions are created. Based on this, legal discourse is a "legal language", that is, a certain legal vocabulary, semantics, pragmatics, and syntax, manifesting itself as a legal ideology in the actualized communicative acts, speech, and legal texts.

In this context, M. Alchuk confirms that the activity of the subject of legal judgments is manifested in the fact that its renewed texts and individual statements are not limited to the norms of formal-logical inference, but are a means of expressing social experience, the degree of the balance between the claims of the subject and its public recognition (Альчук, 2013: 8). With the constant change of the means of expression of social experience, cascades of bifurcations can occur, which significantly affects the balance of legal action. As a result of successive bifurcations, illegal actions lead to a violation of the legal framework. The bifurcation cascade creates a painful transition from order to chaos. An example is the replacement of one political regime by another unconstitutional one.

M. Alchuk emphasizes that the essence, ontological principles and methodology of law are revealed in the legal discourse. Discourse is a synthesis and going beyond it, and this is the pluralism of approaches. At the heart of the discourse is an argumentative discussion between the various positions that give rise to synthetic knowledge. Philosophical and legal discourse connects the multiplicity of knowledge, that is, synthesizes the singular and the plural in legal knowledge (Альчук, 2013: 11). These authors reveal the essence of right-wing discourse from the point of view of the ontology of law. However, the practical side is also of special interest. Here, legal discourse is revealed as a special kind of live communication.

I. Rudneva defines legal discourse as a text of the law in dynamics, which, in the process of interpretation and explanation can be considered as a complex system of lexical, grammatical, and syntactic means of expression and subordination to tasks and goals of communication in law, and which is characterized by specific terminology and special legal categories. Verbalization occurs in the implementation of law, the study of legal phenomena, legal education, and training, which together form a legal discourse (Руднєва, 2018: 89). The author believes that legal discourse is concretized in practice as legal discourse, that is, it is synonymous constructions.

In turn, L. Dobrobog notes the tendency of the legal system to self-regulation, which contributes to its stability. According to the author, law is a functioning, constantly updated system. The system of law is objectively determined by social relations, national, historical, cultural, or other social factors combination of legal elements, in which everything is so closely linked that in relation to the environment and other systems comes as a whole, which is characterized by self-regulation and dynamism (Добробог, 2013: 31). Thus, in philosophical and legal knowledge in the conditions of a crisis, a transitional period of development of modern society, the meaning of the categories "law", "legal discourse", "legal system", "legal action" is being transformed. At the same time, the language of synergetic is effectively used, which describes the essence of uncertainty and chaos.

Conclusion

It can be stated that the foundations of legal discourse are inevitably transformed, developed, violated, taking into account the peculiarities of social development. This is reflected most expressively in the language of law.

An essential feature of bifurcation processes in the field of law and legal institutions is that the variety of legal systems (effective and ineffective) leading to an increase in the variability of the directions of their development. In this state of legal systems, the legal choice is implemented as a gradual formalization and consolidation of a new order.

The reformatting of the legal system is due to the infinitely complex combination of the influence of the subjects of law on it and the quality of their legal actions. Illegal actions can accelerate the emergence of cascades of bifurcations, which will negatively affect the balance of legal systems.

Literature

1. Альчук М. Філософсько-правовий дискурс : Історія і сучасність // Вісник Львівського університету. Серія філос.- політолог. студії. - Випуск 3. - 2013. - С. 7-13.

2. Арнольд В. И., Афраймович В. С., Ильяшенко Ю. С., Шильников Л. П. Теория бифуркаций. «Современные проблемы математики. Фундаментальные направления. Т. 5 (Итоги науки и техники ВИНИТИ АН СССР)». М. - 1985. - 218 с.

3. Гавронская Т. Философско-правовой дискурс понимания свободы и необходимости в историческом контексте // Збірник наукових праць «Гілея: Науковий Вісник». - Випуск 93. - С. 183-187.

4. Герасимова Е. М. Доктрина реалізації свободи в демократичному суспільстві: ідеал і реальність // Вісник Національного авіаційного університету. Серія: Філософія. Культурологія: Збірник наукових праць. - Вип. ІІ (32). К.: НАУ, 2020. - С. 5-9.

5. Гринёв-Гриневич С. В., Сорокина Э. А. К вопросу о методах лингвистических исследований // Вестник Московского государственного областного университета. Серия: Лингвистика. - № 1. - 2010. - С. 23-31.

6. Дзьобань О. П., Мелякова Ю. В., Правовий дискурс справедливості як віртуальна реальність права // Журнал "Інформація і право. - 2(8)/2013: http://www. ippi. org. Ua /journal /96

7. Добробог Л. М. Система права: Теоретико-правовий дискурс // Науковий вісник Ужгородського національного університету. - Випуск 21. Частина ІІ. Том 1. - 2013. С. 30-32.

8. Kharchenko J. V. Timeless and extra-space essence of the universal integrity: topological trivergence of the spiritual, material and virtual worlds // Вісник Національного авіаційного університету. Серія: Філософія. Культурологія: Збірник наукових праць. - Вип. ІІ (32). К.: НАУ, 2020. - С. 19-23.

9. Руднєва І. С. Юридичний дискурс як модель інституційного дискурсу // Вісник ХНУ ім. В. Н. Каразіна. Іноземна філологія. - 2018. - Вип. 87. - С. 85-91.

10. Храмцова Н. Г. Теория правового дискурса: базовые идеи, проблемы, закономерности. Монография. - Курган: Издательство Курганского государственного университета, 2010. - 396 с.

References

1. Alchuk, M. (2013). Filosofsko-pravovyi dyskurs : Istoriia i suchasnist [Philosophical and legal discourse: History and modernity]. Visnyk Lvivskoho universytetu. Seriia filos.-politoloh. Studii, Visnyk of the Lviv University Philosophical Political studies, 3, 7-13 [in Ukrainian].

2. Arnold, V.I., Afraymovich, V.S., Ilyashenko, Yu.S., Shilnikov, L.P. (1985). Teoriya bifurkatsiy [Bifurcation theory]. Sovremennyie problemyi matematiki. Fundamentalnyie napravleniya, Modern problems of mathematics. Fundamental directions. (Vol. 5). Moscow: Itogi nauki i tehniki VINITI AN SSSR [in Russian].

3. Gavronskaya, T. (2015). Filosofsko-pravovoy diskurs ponimaniya svobodyi i neobhodimosti v istoricheskom kontekste [Philosophical and legal discourse of understanding freedom and necessity in a historical context]. Hileia: Naukovyi Visnyk, Gileya: Scientific Bulletin, 93, 183-187 [in Russian].

4. Gerasimova, E.M. (2020). Doktrina realIzatsIYi svobodi v demokratichnomu suspIlstvI: Ideal I realnIst Visnyk Natsionalnoho aviatsiinoho universytetu, Seriya: Filosofiya. Kulturologiya, Proceedings of the National Aviation University, 2(32), 5-9 [in Ukrainian].

5. Grinev-Grinevich, S.V., Sorokina, E.A. (2010). K voprosu o metodah lingvisticheskih issledovaniy [On the question of the methods of linguistic research]. Vestnik Moskovskogo gosudarstvennogo oblastnogo universiteta. Seriya: Lingvistika, Bulletin of the Moscow State Regional University. Series: Linguistics, 1, 23-31 [in Russian].

6. Dzoban, O. P., Melyakova, Yu.V. (2013). Pravovyi dyskurs spravedlyvosti yak virtualna realnist prava [Legal discourse of justice as a virtual reality of law]. Zhurnal "InformatsIya I pravo, Journal "Information and Law", 2(8). Retrieved from: http://www.ippi.org.ua/journal/96 [in Ukrainian].

7. Dobrobog, L.M. (2013). Sistema prava: Teoretiko-pravoviy diskurs [Legal system: Theoretical and legal discourse]. Naukovyi visnyk Uzhhorodskoho natsionalnoho universytetu, Scientific Bulletin of Uzhhorod National University, 21(II), 30-32 [in Ukrainian].

8. Kharchenko, J.V. (2020). Timeless and extra-space essence of the universal integrity: topological trivergence of the spiritual, material and virtual worlds. Visnyk Natsionalnoho aviatsiinoho universytetu, Seriya: Filosofiya. Kulturologiya, Proceedings of the National Aviation University, 2(32), 19-23.

9. Rudneva, I.S. (2018). Yuridichniy diskurs yak model InstitutsIynogo diskursu // Visnyk KhNU im. V. N. Karazina. Inozemna filolohiia, The Journal of V.N. Karazin Kharkiv National University. Series: Foreign Philology, 87, 85-91 [in Ukrainian].

10. Hramtsova, N.G. (2010). Teoriya pravovogo diskursa: bazovyie idei, problemyi, zakonomernosti [The theory of legal discourse: basic ideas, problems, patterns]. Kurgan: Izdatelstvo Kurganskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta [in Russian].

Размещено на Allbest.ru