Вина и позор в контексте становления современных европейских государств (XVI-XX вв.): Сборник статей.
The author differs several approaches to law in classical eurasianism. These distinctions, on his opinion, are based on metalegal grounds – on «alleinheit» theory in the writings of L.P. Karsavin and on «phenomenological method» in the works of N.N. Alexeev
This article is devoted to the Digest of the Laws of the Russian Empire – an embodiment of the operative legal system in late imperial Russia. Even though the Digest contained the law in force, and thus should be studied as a crucial source on Russian (legal) history, its meaning has been often overlooked. The reason for that is a remarkable difference between the original texts of laws adopted by the legislator, and their published form in the Digest. This difference came from the necessary editing procedures when every new piece of legislation was included in the existing system of the Digest. This strange feature of legal procedure when two different versions of a particular law – the original one and the one codified in the Digest – both remained in force should be considered as a part of official autocratic legality in late imperial Russia. Even though it may seem inefficient and irrational, the practice of obligatory codification of laws in the Digest existed for a rather long time – from 1835 until 1917. My research aims to find possible explanations for the Digest’s prolonged existence in the context of political and legal culture of late imperial Russia. What did Russian ‘official legality’ actually mean on the levels of theory and action?
Drawing upon exegetical and scientific writings of Isaac Newton, his followers (W. Whiston) and opponents (Ch. Burnet), present study deals with the rise of objectivism – fundamental epistemic principle underlying the modern scientific worldview. The study is focused upon the synthesis of three epistemological principles, which shaped the science of Enlightenment: hermeneutic transparency of text in exegesis, mathematical certainty in natural science, and realistic mimesis in literary criticism. The author also examines the epistemological project, opposed to objectivistic paradigm, that puts together allegory in biblical scholarship, hypothetical method in physic and the primacy of literariness over referentiality in literary theory. Present article seeks to contribute to the genealogy of objective reality – ontological a priori of the modern scientific thought, emerged from the confusion of methodologies and discourses, characteristic to early Modern Times.