Russian Federation
At the beginning of the article it is noted that criminal legal argumentation has been practically not studied in the theory of criminal law in all periods of its development. At the same time, it is indicated that the idea of argumentation as one of the ways of conducting a discussion arose in ancient times. Attention is drawn to the fact that the theory of argumentation as a separate science did not exist for a long time, and the ability to argue one’s thoughts was learned in courses in logic and rhetoric. The need to create a unified theory of legal argumentation, which should be taught to students of higher and secondary legal educational institutions, is emphasized. Arguments are made for the importance of a separate study of criminal legal argumentation. The elements that make up criminal legal argumentation as a type of human activity are identified and briefly discussed: subject, subjects, content and form. The legal and factual planes of the implementation of criminal legal argumentation are revealed. The features of the intellectual-volitional nature of criminal legal argumentation are studied. The content of both the primary and secondary goals of criminal legal argumentation is determined, and it is also noted which functions are characteristic of it. Cases of mandatory implementation of criminal legal argumentation are established. The meaning of the term “criminal legal argumentation” is analyzed from the point of view of its constituent words. It is especially noted that criminal legal argumentation is a type of legal argumentation and in this regard, several theoretical definitions of the concept of legal argumentation are given, their advantages and disadvantages are indicated. In conclusion, a definition of the concept of criminal legal argumentation is given, which should form the basis for the construction of its holistic theory in the science of criminal law.
legal argumentation, criminal law, criminal legal argumentation, criminal legal argument, criminal law, science of criminal law, criminal legal literature, justification of the criminal legal position
1. Aleksandrov A.S. Cel' i sredstva argumentacii v ugolovnom sudoproizvodstve //Yuridicheskaya tehnika. Ezhegodnik. Nizhniy Novgorod. 2013. № 7. Chast' 1. S. 52-59.
2. Sm. napr.: Ivanova T.V., Nikitina O.V. Pravovaya argumentaciya: uchebnoe posobie dlya vuzov. 2-e izd. pererab. i dop. M., Izd-vo «Yurayt», 2024. 197 s.; Kargin K.V. Ponyatie yuridicheskoy argumentacii // Yuridicheskaya tehnika. 2013. № 7 (chast' 1). S. 6064; Kuznecov A.P. Pravovaya argumentaciya: ponyatie, suschnostnaya harakteristika, znachenie // Yuridicheskaya nauka i praktika: Vestnik Nizhegorodskoy akademii MVD Rossii. 2013. № 23. S. 15-21; Kartashev V.N. Tehnologii yuridicheskoy argumentacii // Yuridicheskaya tehnika. 2013. № 7. (chast' 1). S. 137-141 i dr.
3. Perelman Ch. The New Rhetoric and the Humanities. Essays on Rhetoric and the Humanities. Essays on Rheto-rie and Application. Dordrecht, 1979.
4. Slovar' sovremennogo russkogo literaturnogo yazyka. V 17 tomah. T. 1 (A-B). M-L., Izd-vo Akademii nauk SSSR. 1950. 767 s.
5. Rezhim dostupa: URL: https://kartaslov.ru/znachenie-slova/ugolovno-pravovoy. (data obrascheniya: 23.03.2024)
6. Sm. napr. Makeeva E.A. Pravovaya argumentaciya kak ob'ekt gnoseologicheskogo analiza. Avtoref. diss. kand. filosof. nauk. M., 2003. 21 s.
7. Sm. napr. URL: http://www.lexis-asu.narod.ru/termin/urargum.html. (data obrascheniya: 23.03.2024)
8. Sm. Usmanove E.F. Ponyatie i funkcii yuridicheskoy argumentacii // Sovremennye nauchnye issledovaniya i innovacii. 2015. № 1. Ch. 3 [Elektronnyy resurs]. URL: https://web.snauka.ru/issues/2015/01/45623 (data obrascheniya: 23.03.2024).
9. Sm. napr. Kargin K.V. Ponyatie i elementy yuridicheskoy argumentacii. N. Novgorod. 2011. 67 s.
