Communicative bases for changing paradigm in legal education

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru/

Communicative bases for changing paradigm in legal education

(Kravtsov Yu.S., Dniprovsk State Technical University, Bogomaz K.Yu., Dniprovsk State Technical University, Sorokina L.N., Dniprovsk State Technical University)

Introduction

The subject of any science is qualitatively defined, and the integration of the sciences involves a strict delineation of objects of research, so it is necessary to have a clear idea of the objective grounds for the classification of different fields of scientific knowledge. Of course, lawyers, sociologists and philosophers, from their theoretical and methodological positions, explore the object and subject of legal education. For example, jurisprudence brings to the concept of legal education its legal system and internal patterns and mechanisms of interaction of its structural elements. The legal person is perceived here from the standpoint of legal norms. But for the concept of continuous legal formation, this is clearly not enough.

The concept of legal education is interdisciplinary: being in the philosophy of law, its formation depends on the reliance of law. It should be borne in mind the system of continuous legal education, which shapes legal consciousness in people of school, university and post -university age and including a meaningful legal part. Then special legal education will represent a separate case here, and legal education as a whole will be a set of disciplines, including the philosophy of law, not just one legal science. Thus, legal education and education in the field of law are not identical. The substantive side of the concept includes more general and broad problems: philosophical, sociological and psychological aspects of law, for example, understanding of law as an instrument of development of freedom of the autonomous person: external freedom, freedom of will and formal measure of freedom, the principle of generality and inevitability of responsibility. Assumes the mission of protecting these values. In turn, both law and morality are deeply related to the concept of justice, when justice acts as a legal concept, sanctioned certain social relations, rules of behavior and actions of people.

Domestic legal science is in the stage of systemic transformation. Systemic transformation in science is the formation of a new paradigm scientific knowledge, accompanied by a meaningful expansion of the boundaries of traditional methodology, taking into account the achievements of other sciences and, as a consequence, improving your own research methodology. Domestic legal science is in the stage of systemic transformation. Systemic transformation in science is the formation of a new paradigm of scientific knowledge, which is accompanied by a meaningful expansion of the boundaries of traditional methodology, taking into account the achievements of other sciences and, as a consequence, improving their own research methodology. In the list of topical researches of methodological foundations of modern jurisprudence, priorities are given to systematic knowledge of law . changing paradigm legal education

The priorities are due to the fact that the overall entry of law is the initial, subject -forming concept of legal science as a whole and certain branches of legal knowledge, in particular. Therefore, it should be taken into account and be present in the specific, detailed definitions and characteristics of law, as a regulatory and regulatory system, in the whole system of concepts developed within the framework of legal science .

Naturally, in such a quality, the concept of "law" acquires the status of system-categorical identification (subject-forming category) and is qualified as a tool of science itself. With other categories and concepts, they form a stable system of scientific knowledge with potential developmental opportunities. Meanwhile, in scientific publications on the problems of legal science, both methodological and pedagogical and theoretical and applied nature, paradigm inertia of thinking, and more commonly observed. It is difficult to overcome the canons of the classical scientific paradigm, based on the principles of legal positivism as a whole and clairic legal positivism, in particular.

Formulation of the problem

At the present stage, philosophy's approach to the phenomenon of education is actualized by the need for a constructive solution to theoretical and practical problems facing society. Starting from the middle of the 20th century in social philosophy, there is a fact of isolation of a new direction in the spiritual production of society - the philosophy of education. Throughout its development, philosophical thought persistently investigated education as a special social and value knowledge. And only now has philosophy begun to study education as a separate sphere of social reality.

The difference between education and the field of design and project development is that in education, the project is implemented only in order to reveal the methodological prerequisites of thinking, the methods of action and communication that implement it. subdivisions of educational economy, educational reform of the army, educational security, educational regional - state construction, educational ethno-national policy, educational law, educational personality, etc.

Education should contribute to the fact that a person is fully armed in the face of the demands of society. Education, by its structure, is designed to ensure the protection of a person, providing him with some capital that allows him to find his place in the modern world, clearly orienting himself in the situation. This is the socio-cultural function of education, its social-critical potential, which allows people to critically relate to contemporary phenomena.

Analysis of research and publications

All philosophical universals are value-based in nature and the axiological component of their content always has the most extreme, universal character. Therefore, many educational researchers first of all begin with an explanation of its content as a socio-cultural phenomenon. Here we can highlight the works of I.P. Andrushchenko, T.N. Buiko, B.S. Gershunsky, I.A. Zyazyuna, G.L. Ilyina, V.G. Kremenya, S.B. Krymsky, Levchuk, K.S. Lutaya, B.C. Lyakhovich, S.A. Nikolaenko, O.P. Punchenko and many others. In Western philosophy, one can highlight the works of J. Bruner, M. Weber, B.L. Wulfsona, G.-G. Gadamera, G.G. Hoffman, E. Durkheim, G.E. Zborovsky, G. Simmel, F.G. Klumbs, Cornel Popa, P.P. Singh, P. Sorokin, V. Frankl, M. Foucault, M. Schiller and others.

The process of transition from industrial to post-industrial or information society calls into question the possibility of understanding modern forms of sociality from the perspective of social theory. The constantly changing realities of the information society cannot be considered from the standpoint of classical theory, which views society as a certain certainty accessible to rational description. An authentic way of describing society is the critical theory of society, presented primarily in the works of representatives of the Frankfurt School (T. Adorno, M. Horkheimer), and the systemic theory of society of the functionalist type (E. Durkheim, R. Merton, T. Parsons). However, with the transition of society to an information model of development, the need arises to create a theory that adequately describes the communicative nature of the information society. Description of modern social processes from the position of traditional theories turns out to be impossible, if only because the analysis of social problems involves turning to the theory of communication.

Presentation of the main material

A feature of modern social cognition, which sets a new paradigm, is that it is carried out through an analysis of what ideas indirectly the cognitive attitude towards social phenomena is accompanied by a deep rethinking of the communicative nature of social reality, changes in the socio- communicative sphere. Social phenomena and processes appear not as a reality independent of a person, but in the form of the effect of agreement / disagreement / subjects, the effect of their mutual influence. The communicative field of agents is determined by rules, when the interaction of horizons makes conscious intentions and volitional decisions secondary. A characteristic feature of communicative consciousness is the necessary structurally organized space of the social field. An agent of social action is not just the performer of some type of social action, he is also the author of these types of action. But, having once created representatives of social norms, he finds himself hostage to his own invention. The created institutions begin to lead an independent life, already influencing the agent himself. This is how the alienation of one's own activity from the creator occurs: a social institution is created, which is the material embodiment of the structures of consciousness of agents operating within the social field. Social reality is transferred from “physical space” to the plane of consciousness, i.e. begins to be thought of as intentional relationships of meanings in the minds of the subjects of actions, with the only caveat that these relationships are not always transparent to the agents themselves [ 1, p. 29].

According to Habermas, real communicative action differs from all others in that it acts as a mechanism for coordinating the plans of social actions of subjects, achieved in the perlocutionary acts described in analytical philosophy by Austin and Strawson [3, p. 87]. The state of post-modern society is determined primarily by culture. First of all, culture internalizes, on the scale of society, external influences, including economic ones, into the human life world. It is culture that acts as a mechanism that mediates the external influence of society on law. The state of culture in post-industrial society is called the meaningless term “postmodern”. The unprecedented popularity ideas of J. Baudrillard, F. Guattari, J. Deleuze, J. Derrida, F. Jamieson, J.-F. Lyotard, R. Rorty, I. Hassan, V. Eco and others, forces us to take seriously other claims for understanding postmodernity and, in accordance with the conclusions obtained, determine how the new picture of the world determines the ontology of law. “Postmodernism... accomplishes something like a revision of the foundations of science,” writes P. Bourdieu[2]. This is nothing more than a continuation (radicalization) of the position of postpositivist philosophy about the absence of absolute truth. Theory does not have a monopoly on truth when “falsificationism” is recognized as the criterion of scientificity.

Regarding jurisprudence, such a position can be designated as radical relativism. According to this point of view, the concept of law cannot be considered justified, since no description of law is adequate. Scientific language is no longer a “mirror of nature”, but is the same part of the “inventory of reality” as the objects studied by science. Language used in science is a subject; objects of reality, in turn, acquire features of linguistic nature" [3]. In essence, this approach is a type of “linguistic revolution” in scientific studies. This idea is used quite actively in sociological phenomenology, from the point of view of whose supporters social reality is formed not by things or events of the material world, but by the meaning invested in these objects and events.

Dialogue theory has two directions. First of all, the philosophical (existential) tradition stands out, represented by the work of M. M. Bakhtin and the successors of his ideas today (for example, B. S. Bibler), as well as members of the “Patmos” circle, organized in Berlin in 1919, among whom should be noted. Buber and O. Rosenstock - Hussy. The main attention here is paid to the formation of personality, the unique life world of a person, which is possible only through meeting with another. Thus, we have two approaches not only to the ontology of being as such, but also to the ontology of law. In the first (existential) case, the emphasis is on the subject being in a legal relationship with another subject, and in the second - on the rule of law, institution, system of law. At first glance, these are two incompatible points of view. However, it seems that the principle of dialogue itself, which is in many ways similar to the principle of complementarity, allows us to identify similarities and interpenetration of these approaches. Thus, law is both a structure (rules of behavior) and its reproduction (which is accompanied by both practical actions and and mental processes) in human behavior. In general, dialogue is a contradiction of existence, which simultaneously contains a mechanism for resolving this contradiction. The philosophy of education includes paradigms and maxims: humanization, socialization, heuristics, elitism (with an analysis of its criteria), dialogue, etc. This is thinking about a person about her freedom, about “my”, “my” belonging to a community, to the culture of a people and another culture (social, national, educational, artistic, etc.). In the new understanding, the paradigm of research and the praxeological means of cognition and action is dialogue. Dialogue is the existence of spiritual and in particular legal and philosophical culture - meetings of cultures - mutual understanding and penetration of cultures.

Critical thinking is dialogical, interested in expanding discourse. Its metacriteria are truth, justice, goodness, beauty, components of the meaning of human life. In determining a person's intellectual independence and responsibility, critical thinking involves the connection between the creative person and the community in which he or she interacts, and the search for alternatives and priorities for self-realization. However, in the conditions of unprecedented social transformations, the study of previous experience loses its meaning. Since the conditions for further action are no longer the same as they were in the beginning, but are constantly changing, thinking must be critically innovative.

Thus, all these factors and circumstances of the constitution of reality (specific "material" at each level of social organization; the modal aspect of existence; the unity of the ontic and ontological aspects of social life; mass and statistical nature of social phenomena; the role of language of observation and conceptualization in their objectification ; dialectics is not completely coincident ratio of social constructs and their concepts) cause a flexible combination of certainty and uncertainty, clarity and blur in the ontological status of social objects. The latter have certainty, clarity, reliability to the extent that they become objects of activity and thinking of social actors and give the opportunity to achieve effective results (suffice it to recall the famous interpretation of the ontological argument for pudding). However, the presence of many social phenomena of the nature of "fuzzy set", the probabilistic nature of social facts, the ambiguity of natural language determine the degree of uncertainty of the data subject.

Physiologists and cybernetics, neuropsychologists and linguists, semiotics and psychologists work today to study the role of language in the conscious reflection of reality and the organization of human behavior. The individual results of specific sciences, extended to the whole of nature as a whole, and to the nature of the relationship between language and thought, quite often not only do not collide with each other, but also mutually exclusive. This fact makes relevant the philosophical study of the relationship of language and consciousness, the role and place of language in the spiritual development of human world and the organization of their behavior.

Today in the philosophical, cybernetic and synergetic literature there is a difference of forms of real space. If earlier space was understood only as the physical arrangement of things / substrates, bodies /, now researchers are increasingly guided by the philosophical definition of space as a structure of coexistence of properties and qualities of arbitrary nature. Overcoming a purely substratum interpretation of space, science introduces the idea of a real functional space, which is not described by point and metric localization of some quality.

Today, the old paradigm is being replaced by the paradigm of intersubjective understanding and communication. Today, "the focus of research has shifted," Y. Gabermas notes, "from cognitive- instrumental to communicative rationality. For him, the paradigm is not the attitude of a private subject to anything in the objective world that can be presented and manipulated, but the interpersonal attitude that subjects capable of communication and action enter into if they rotate in the environment of natural language, use culturally-dedicated interpretations and at the same time turn to something objective, common to them social and in accordance with the subjective world" [4, p. 58]. Y. Gabermas substantiates the essence of communicative rationality, notes that it has its own structure. Y. Gabermas characterized it as follows: "When the speaker expresses himself about something within the framework of the everyday context, he enters into a relationship not only with something existing in the objective world... but also with something in the social world ... and to something in his own subjective world" [4, p. 88].

Communicative rationality is purposefully focused on the search for truth through a system of mutual understanding.The content of education is realized in communication in the form of discussion, polemic, dispute and, most importantly, dialogue. Without them, education cannot function, as they are universal forms of knowledge transfer and acquisition. If the discussion is not always carried during the discussion a pronounced militant character, the etymology of the word "polemic" itself comes from the Greek "polemus" - war. A dispute in a broad sense is also a polemic that arose after an interestingly formulated problem. The main concept in this triad is discussion, as one of the forms of acquiring knowledge in the process of searching for the truth. It teaches the subject of learning to think broadly, freely, creatively.

Being both the field of science and the field of practical activity, the right provides unique opportunities for solving modern pedagogical tasks, allows not only to acquire legal knowledge, but also to develop special abilities and practical skills of action in the social sphere. The uniqueness of law, as a specific form of social consciousness and social practice, also determines the considerable educational potential of legal courses. The position of the active one, its identity determines the situations in the legal space. The choice of one or another method of action depends on its purposes, values, personal preferences. Familiarity with legal situations as situations of choice, analysis of the position and actions of the person, which is their subject, creates the conditions for personal self -determination - to find the answer to the question "who do I, what do I want?". Legal regulation covers all spheres of public life. A person active in society is the subject of many types of legal relations - civil, administrative, labor, family, etc. The use of relevant legal material in teaching contributes to the formation of a complex multidimensional view of oneself, to pass the process of identification. The need to act in the light of other people, taking into account the legal norms, becomes a condition for the development of the "I" of the child as a complex organized for "I" of other people.

Thus, law as educational content sets the conditions for the development of abilities that are substantially different from the abilities formed on scientific content, including on the materials of other courses of the social and humanitarian cycle-is the development of self-concept of self and self-concepts. In addition, working with legal content creates the conditions for the formation of a number of abilities related to the development of thinking and language, which, just, form the basis of human identification on the one hand - legal.

On the one hand, in law, as in most training courses, the task, exercise allow you to practice the rules. On the other hand, the analysis and solution of each individual legal case requires its multidimensional consideration, accounting for the diversity of legislative acts, different norms, interests and positions of the parties. When applying legal norms to each case, the dialectic of the general and the individual realizes itself. The ability to project a norm for a particular situation and see a specific norm through the prism is a completely unique ability to identify, which arises in the field of law and which is based on a special type of thinking (critical thinking).

This type of thinking provides an analysis of open -type situations: they do not have a reference solution, they are related not only to traditional mental operations, but also to the value choice, with the recognition of the multiplicity of the right decisions. The material for its development is also present in other socio-humanities, especially in some fields of philosophy. But the fundamental difference between legal courses is that thinking in them is formed within practical actions to analyze situations, that is, formed as a side of practical consciousness.

The work of a person (especially young people) with legal material becomes a condition for the development of special linguistic means of expression of their own thoughts. Language development is a special task that is solved during work with any educational material, if it is decorated verbally. But in the field of law requires an expanded argumentation of your thoughts, the use of special linguistic means to strengthen the impact on the listener, build and verbal design of complex multi -level logical conclusions. Special legal rhetoric, of course, is unattainable at school, but acquaintance with its best models, attempts to organize complex language periods independently - all this can and should open the child in the form of the ability to build his own action.

Thus, working with training courses provides the development of ideas about themselves, relationships to themselves and community of people, assimilation of generally accepted and developing personal value orientations, rules and norms of behavior, ways of action in society, as well as the development of thinking and language. All this together and determines the legal identity of a person.

Dialogue in education is not just a form of acquiring knowledge through broadcasted information, it is not a process of passive accumulation of knowledge, it is an interactive form of searching for the truth. Dialogism in the assimilation of the spiritual culture of Ukraine is the universality of “deepening historical forms of culture” into the consciousness of modern man, transforming external dialogue with former forms of culture into a dialogue of self-awareness, into a micro-dialogue of spiritual enrichment, that is, the interpenetration of the past and present into a single spiritual phenomenon. In the process of such dialogue, the simultaneity of the spiritual cultures of the people is created. It can be assumed that dialogue is the universality of the humanitarian [5, p. 84].

Today it is considered proven that reality is dichotomous (antinomic in the ontological sense): it includes opposite aspects, sides that are in a state of not only difference, but also mutual conditionality (due to which the integrity of the structure is maintained and at the same time the possibility of its modification, response to external influences). Dialogue is tension, conditionality and mutual transition of antinomies. This fully applies to law. P. Berger and T. Luckman [1], believe that such a mechanism represents successively changing stages in which the resolution of the contradictions of social (in this case, legal) reality between the material and the ideal, the existing and the proper, the individual and the general and etc. , and thereby a reproduction of legal reality.

The initial stage of this process is externalization, which is the manifestation of human activity on the outside. In this case, we mean legally significant externalization - the implementation of legal acts - actions. The external legal activity of a person is inevitably objectified in legal consequences, which, “breaking away” from the subject - their “author”, acquire an independent life,

i. e. objectified. Objectification is the second stage of the mechanism of law reproduction. Behavior and its result are inevitably correlated (by both the individual and society) with the rule of law that functionally precedes this behavior. In most cases, behavior is consistent with the rule of law (even if it is an offense, in most cases it corresponds to a prohibited rule of law). Therefore, as a rule, the mechanism of reproduction of law contains these two stages, which at another level - the level of mental processes - are accompanied by the stage of internalization (reflection, reproduction, cognition and other external manifestations of human legal activity).

However, more complex cases are also possible, related to human creative activity, when legal behavior (in this case, having social significance) and its consequences “do not fit” into the existing normative and institutional system. This innovative process seems to be the most important and interesting because it does not show the mechanical reproduction of law, but its change when new norms are formed. Assessing legal behavior and its results as innovative presupposes society's response to this innovation. Often (especially in traditional societies) such a reaction is negative.

But not always. Sometimes innovation is assessed positively. A positive assessment on the part of the ruling elite or a reference group for the general population is the next stage in the reproduction of law (already innovative), which is called selection. Only a specific historical and sociological analysis can clarify (although not always and never completely) why this or that new legal institution was chosen, especially in the field of public law. However, the adoption of a law does not mean that it has become law, i.e. entered into the flesh and blood of the legal order, the life world of the common man, in the legal culture of a given society. This requires legitimation of this innovation.

The mechanism of legitimation of a legal norm is even more complex than the mechanism of its selection, that is, selection by a relatively narrow group of officials (especially in a multicultural society). This includes the historical past of the people, and today's expectations, and cultural heritage (archetypes of the collective unconscious), and the manipulation of public consciousness by the media, and the economic situation, and the political situation, etc. and so on. At the same time, legitimation is not just momentary approval of the political course of a leader, but the introduction of a new rule of behavior into collective and individual attitudes at the level of “body language” (a practical stereotype of behavior). This point brings legal legitimation closer to the content of internalization i.e. with legal socialization, which, as is known, accompanies every action of a person throughout his life.

The formation of information and communication technologies transforms the fase of the entire education system.This is due to the fact that new ways of bringing information to the subject of education are widely implemented in education today. This not only has expanded the field of distance learning as a complex of educational services, which with the help of a specialized information and educational environment provides the necessary information for the subject of education, but, importantly, contributes to the expansion of continuous value-oriented education. Information technologies acted as the basis for the formation of general educational space.

Conclusions

The solution to the conflict between paradigms may consist in the construction of a more general global theory, which contains contradictory paradigms as their own special cases. The process of personality formation in modern Ukraine poses urgent problems before the higher school, which are united in a single but substantiated complex of philosophy. The law, sociology and psychology of law in order to form in student youth the image of a socially active, self -aware and critically thinking personality, which is capable of independent decisions and balanced actions, which correlate with the principles of humanism and justice.

References:

1. Zinchenko E.V. (2003) "Communicative rationality" as a priori of social sciences (methodological review of projects) // Theoretical Journal of Credo New No. 3, рр. 23-32 (in Ukraine)

2. Bourdieu P.(1994) Rethinking the State: Genesis and Structure of the Bureaucratic Field. // Sociological Theory. Vol. 12. No. 1. P. 1-19 (in Ukraine)

3. Habermas Jurgen.(1996) Communicative action and discourse // Primary sources of communicative philosophy -K. : Lybid, рр. 84-91. (in Ukraine)

4. Berger PL, Luckmann T (1966) The Social Construction of Reality: A Treatise in the Sociology of Knowledge. Garden City, NY: Doubleday. 36 ( in USA)

5. Konoh M.S. (2001)Formation of a new philosophy of education in Ukraine: Socio-philisophical analysis: [monograph].- K.: Higher Sc.,223 р. (in Ukraine)

Размещено на Allbest.ru