META-ANTHROPOLOGICALCOHERENCE “TRANSCENDENTALEXCHANGE IN LEGAL COMMUNICATION”

Antonina Tokarska
AttachmentSize
PDF icon Full text PDF197.21 KB
Abstract: 
The issues of meta-anthropological coherence of “transcendental exchange” in the legal communication are considered. The results of activity, their motive power capable to be equally powerful means of both constructive and correlating steps are noted. Transcendental exchange is being built up due to disclosing of genuine interest in the fate of an individual, restraining emotions in conflicting communication. It is stated that meta-anthropological models of communicative interaction are extended over various fields of activities: policy, economics, moral and law, etc. Their prime functioning role to ensure effective interaction of subjects of law, their successful pursuit to establish efficient contacts non-violating fundamental human rights and freedoms. Metaanthropological planning of views exchange in legal communication is based on complex sociopsycho- linguo-mental speech actualizing universalism of different models of social practice in communication. Concept of law as communication on a level of every branch legal metadiscourse is corroborated.
References: 

1. Apel’ K.-O. Dyskursyvna etyka: polityka i pravo / Karl-Otto Apel’; per. z nim. [Discourse ethics: politics and law]. Kyiv: Publ. Ukrai’ns’kyj filosofs’kyj fond, 1999. 74 p. 2. Apel’ K.-O. Kommunykatyvnoe soobshhestvo kak transcendental’naja predposylka social’nyh nauk / Karl-Otto Apel’, Transformacija filosofii. [Communicative community as a transcendental precondition of social sciences] Moscow: Publ. Logos, 2001. pp. 193–236. 3. Gabermas Ju. Strukturni peretvorennja u sferi vidkrytosti / Jurgen Gabermas; per. z nim. A. Onyshko [Structural transformation in the sphere of communication], L’viv: Publ. Litopys, 2000. 317 p. 4. G’ofe O. Rozum i pravo. Skladovi interkul’turnogo pravovogo dyskursu / O. G’ofe; per. z nim. L. A. Sytnychenko, M. D. Kultajevoi’. [The mind and the law. Elements of an intercultural legal discourse], Kyiv: Publ. Al’terpres, 2003. 264 p. 5. Klimova G. Jurydychnyj konflikt: prychyny i sutnist’ / G. Klimova, Visnyk Akademii’ pravovyh nauk Ukrai’ny. [The legal conflict: reasons
and definition], 2002. Vol. 1 (28). pp. 99–105. 6. Tokars’ka A. S. Komunikacija u pravi ta pravoohoronnij dijal’nosti: monografija / A. S. Tokars’ka, LJuI MVS Ukrai’ny. [Communication in the legal and law enforcement sphere], L’viv: Publ. Svit, 2005. 284 p. 7. Ponjattja i znachennja dosudovogo slidstva. [Elektronnyj resurs]. [Definition and meaning of prejudicial trial] Rezhym dostupu: http://ua. textreferat. com/referat-5887-1. html 8. Tokars’ka A. S. Pravovi aspekty suspil’noi’ komunikacii’: monografija /
A. S. Tokars’ka. [Legal aspects of social communications] L’viv: L’vDUVS, 2008. 188 p. 9. Tokars’ka A. S. Pravova komunikacija v konteksti postklasychnogo pravorozuminnja: avtoref. dys. na zdobuttja nauk. stupenja d-ra juryd. nauk: spec. 12.00.12 “Filosofija prava” / Antonina Semenivna Tokars’ka [Legal communication in the context of postclassical legal understanding] Kyi’vs’kyj nacional’nyj universytet vnutrishnih sprav. Kyiv, 2008. 36 p. 10. Jurkevych P. Istorija filosofii’ prava. Filosofija prava. Filosofs’kyj shhodennyk / P. Jurkevych. [History of the philosophy of law. Philosophy of law. Philosophical diary], Kyiv: Red. zh-lu “Ukrai’ns’kyj svit”, 1999. 751 p.

Bibliography: 
Vìsn. Nac. unìv. “Lʹvìv. polìteh.”, Ser.: Ûrid. nauki, 2016; 845(10): 428–433