Introduction. The author of the article describes the history of the formation and development of postclassical studies of law. They originated in our country through the efforts of A. V. Polyakov in the early 2000s and today represent an important direction or approach in modern legal science. The authors who should be counted among the supporters of postclassical studies of law include N. V. Razuvaev, E.V. Timoshina, I. B. Lomakina, V.V.Arkhipov, E.N. Tonkov, D. E. Tonkov, L.A. Kharitonov, A. E. Chernokov, I. I. Osvetimskaya, E. G. Samokhina, Yu. A. Vedeneev, V. I. Pavlov, N. F. Kovkel, E. M. Krupenya, S. I. Maksimov, M. A. Belyaev, N. V. Malinovskaya, V. V. Denisenko, S. V. Tikhonov, A. V. Skorobogatov, A. V. Krasnov. The author believes that the works of V. V. Lazarev, I. A. Isaev, I. F. Machin, Y. Y. Vetyutnev, I. F. Nevvazhay, S. N. Kasatkin and some other scientists are close to postclassical studies of law. Among foreign scientists, we should mention E. Pattaro, B. Leiter, B. Brozhek, B. Melkevik, C. Varga, E. Fittipaldi, and others.

Methodology and materials. Post-classical methodology is a method of studying “supercomplex systems”. What are postclassical studies of law in terms of their institutional status? The author argues that one cannot talk about a scientific school or a paradigm, but one can talk about a research program, an approach or direction.

Results and discussion. The article discusses the substantive characteristics of postclassical studies of law. Among them, we are talking about the multidimensional nature of law, humanitarianism, and practical orientation.

Conclusions. The differences between postclassical studies of law and postmodernism are shown. A demarcation line is drawn between classical, nonclassical and postclassical studies of law.

Introduction. The article attempts to examine the main patterns and driving forces of state evolution using specific historical material from the evolution of states in the Ancient World. According to the author, identifying such patterns is difficult because the historical process cannot be identified with natural processes and phenomena that can be quantitatively described and formulated on this basis as universal laws. The author believes that it is more appropriate to use the category of the meaning of world history, on the basis of which the specific historical process is revealed in relation to various legal orders and legal traditions of the past, in particular to the states of the Ancient World, which are the subject of the study.

Methodology and materials. The study of the subject is carried out on the basis of post-classical methodology developed by modern theorists and historians of law (S. V. Kodan, D. A. Pashentsev, A. V. Polyakov, I. L. Chestnov, et al). The main research methods used in this work include, first of all, socio-anthropological, phenomenological, cultural-historical, semiotic and other methods that complement the classical (positivistic) methodology traditionally used in literature.

Results of the study and their discussion. The author identifies the main factors in the evolution of the states of the Ancient World, which include: firstly, the universalization of spiritual (moral, religious, legal, political and other) values; secondly, the improvement of the means of sign communication, which facilitates the transfer of cultural information to an increasing number of people and thereby involves them in legal and political communication; thirdly, the growth of the structural complexity of states, which is a response to the challenges created by the external, social and cultural environment; fourthly, the mutual influences of cultural traditions that facilitate the transfer of historical experience. Based on the conducted study, it is concluded that the transition to each subsequent stage of the evolution of the state contributes to an increasingly deeper and more complete disclosure of the meaning of world history, as well as the achievement of unity in diversity by humanity, which is the goal and purpose of historical development.

Conclusions. The meaning of world history, revealed in the course of world-historical development, predetermines its purposeful nature. At the same time, the goal of world history, including the history of the states of the Ancient World, is a characteristic of the development itself, determining its general direction and main stages. It seems that such an understanding of the goal as the most complete disclosure of the axiological content of world history removes the question of the so-called “end of history”, achievable at least in the distant historical perspective.

Introduction. Modern general legal theory is characterized by the formation of post-classical legal theories and concepts, which coexist in the same research field with traditional, classical cognitive approaches to law. Understanding the origins and essence of post-classical approaches to law is a relevant task for contemporary general theoretical jurisprudence.

Methodology and materials. The aim of the article is to clarify the prerequisites for the formation and the essence of post-classical jurisprudence as a direction of modern legal knowledge. The work also explores post-classical legal anthropology and the concepts developing within its framework. The preparation of the article employed dialectical discourse-analytical, comparative legal methods, the method of typologizing stages of scientific rationality, analysis and synthesis.

Research results and discussion. It is substantiated that post-Soviet general theoretical jurisprudence represents an independent formation of knowledge. Its key principle is methodological pluralism, which allows for the coexistence of different languages of legal cognition. Its relevance is determined, on the one hand, by the crisis of Western modern European methodology, and on the other hand, by the possibility of researching indigenous legal traditions.

Conclusions. It is proven that post-classical jurisprudence is based on post-non-classical scientific rationality and critically rethinks the classical model of the legal subject. Within the framework of the “anthropological turn,” a new anthropological-legal concept is proposed. It focuses on the person in law, their attributes, and their distinction from formal-dogmatic elements, which opens up new possibilities for resolving anthropo-oriented legal problems.

Introduction. Andrey V. Polyakov’s communicative theory of law is an influential post-classical, anthropological approach in modern Russian legal theory that sometimes face with critical examination in academic literature. However, a significant portion of this criticism is based on a non-systemic understanding or misinterpretation of the theory’s key tenets. This study aims to conduct a systematic critical analysis of the most representative criticisms of the theory.

Methodology and materials. The research is based on a critical and systematic analysis of publications by following opponents of the communicative theory of law (V. V. Domakov, V. V. Matveev, L. V. Golovko, O. V. Martyshin, V. I. Kruss, A. A. Egorov, M. V. Antonov, E. N. Tonkov). The research employs logical methods (analysis, synthesis, generalization, comparison) within the methodological framework of the communicative approach itself, incorporating the principles of post-classical scientific rationality that emphasize complexity, non-linearity, and the role of the researcher in the process of cognition.

Results and discussion. The criticism directed at the communicative theory of law was classified into two types: 1) apparent criticism, stemming from a superficial engagement with the theory and interpretations of its provisions taken out of context; 2)reasoned criticism, based on adeep understanding of the theory but originating from different methodological premises (primarily positivism). For each type of criticism, the article provides detailed counterarguments and comprehensive responses that clarify and defend the main theses of the communicative approach.

Conclusion. The research confirms the heuristic value and methodological validity of the communicative theory of law as an effective tool for solving modern scientific and practical problems. Its key advantage is the use of anthropological approach, within which a person with his rights, freedoms and responsibilities is placed at the center of law. Law is understood not as a self-referential system, but as a phenomenon constructed in intersubjective communication, aimed at ensuring peaceful coexistence and balance between individual freedom and the commonweal, focused on social and practical significance.

Introduction. The article explores the main milestones in the history of understanding the possibilities of the phenomenon of law as a regulator and the legal possibilities of legal entities. The purpose is to study the evolution of legal motivation towards the common good in relation to the global-stage interpretation of the theory of socio-economic formations.

Methodology and materials. The vision of the development of the phenomenon of law is based on L. I. Petrazhitsky’steleological hypothesis of “law as the intuition of the common good.” The study contains a complementary application of the communicative-phenomenological theory of law, the formation and evolutionary approaches to the study of society as a whole, and the principles of dialectics.

Research results and their discussion. It is shown that the normativity of consciousness (specific historical moral and law) cannot be reduced to socio-economic conditions, since, by virtue of its autonomy, much of the values prioritized by consciousness remain truly mysterious; the construction of the concept of socio-economic formation (its very “atmosphere”) is impossible without the normativity of consciousness that constitutes and accompanies it; the normativity of consciousness is a condition and prerequisite for a concrete historical formational model of legal communication due to its epistemological primacy in relation to social matter, and it is the progressive changes in its content that determine the legal progress of humanity as a whole.

Conclusions. The “zero cycle” of legal communication arises with the emergence of the human ancestral community as a limiter of the laws of sociality (hierarchy and inequality); it develops as an expansion of “pacified circles” (through the thorns of its own denial) in the slave-owning formation; the dialectical leap into feudalism is an increase in awareness of the possibilities of law as a personal interest of subjects of law, not only ruling, but and subordinates (denial of denial); “moving” towards the realization of law as the personal (formal) freedom of each individual (the initial state of modern normative consciousness, which is in the phase of denial).

Introduction. The article examines the normativity of legal language through the lens of speech act theory, emphasizing its performative nature. The author argues that legal language cannot be reduced to a purely descriptive function: it not only refers to norms but actively produces legally significant actions.

Methodology and materials. The study applies an analytic method and offers a theoretical reconstruction of key philosophical approaches, primarily the performative theories of J. L. Austin, H. L. A. Hart, and J. R. Searle. Legal texts, including statutes and regulations, are used to illustrate the pragmatic functioning of legal language in institutional contexts.

Results and discussion. The article presents that the normativity of legal language manifests chiefly in its capacity to generate legal consequences through speech acts. The distinction between normative and descriptive statements in law is analyzed, along with the specific features of legal performatives such as commands, prohibitions, and permissions. Legal discourse is shown to be marked by institutional validity and contextual dependence.

Conclusions. Legal language exhibits a distinct type of normativity realized through performative speech acts. This normativity is not reducible to logical implication or moral obligation, but is grounded in institutional rules that determine the legal force of utterances. Thus, legal language is not merely a vehicle for expressing norms, but a mechanism for their institutional enactment.

The problem of „is” and „ought” is no longer treated as a general philosophical-legal difficulty, but as a question of the structure of legal norms in the process of their practical application. It becomes clear that in different types of norms, the decisive factor is not only the imperative of obligation (the „norm programme”) but also the factual structure of that part of social reality which underlies the norm (the „norm sphere”). The separation of „law” and „reality” gives way to a more thorough analysis of the directive and social reality-shaping elements of normativity. This has been examined in particular detail using the example of fundamental rights and other provisions of constitutional law. However, a similar challenge faces all other areas of law: to find a new form of interaction between the law in action and the findings of the social sciences. For legal sciences as awhole, this poses the task of rethinking their scientific and epistemological purpose.

Introduction. Research methodology issues are rarely the subject of scientific discussion in jurisprudence. At the same time, it is difficult to overestimate the importance of research methodology, it forms the basis for scientific assessment and solution of private scientific issues, sets the vector of holistic scientific perception of the subject of research. In the science of public law, attention is not often paid to the true purpose of public (normative-authoritative) regulation, which consists not only in the public organization of society, but also in the recognition, observance and protection of human rights and freedoms. The purpose of the article is to consider the problems associated with determining the appropriate goals and means of public regulation of social relations in relation to ensuring human rights.

Methodology and materials. The study is based on the basic postulates of the general theory of human activity and the theory of dualism of regulation of social relations, which make it possible to draw a clear distinction between law as a sphere of self-regulation and law as a means of public organization of society. With this understanding of the regulation of social relations, based on the separation of private and public relations, the main beneficiary is a person, his personal, economic and political rights. Not only specific legal methods of research are used, but also such methods of the science of human activity as methodological individualism and methodological uniqueness, according to which the sequence of scientific research first involves the knowledge of the nature of man and his activities, and then, as a consequence, the knowledge of society as a form of human cooperation, with its institutions, including the state.

Research results and their discussion. The methodology of the science of public law should be based on the general methodology of studying human activity, taking into account that it is distinguished in the system of legal sciences. The article provides a general description of human rights in public relations as an object and subject of legal research. The position is substantiated that the purpose of public (normative-authoritative) regulation is not only in the public organization of society as an end in itself, but also, above all, in ensuring human rights. Therefore, research in the field of public law should aim to study the relationship “man – state”, in which the provision of fundamental human rights and freedoms by the state is the main functional purpose, and the structure of state power is a means of properly ensuring fundamental human rights.

Conclusions. The methodology of studying human rights in public relations allows us to take a new look at many problems of public law science, which should be solved from the position of the legal content of public power, its purpose and purpose. The methodology of studying human rights should be based on the theory of dualism in regulating social relations, based on the fundamental difference between law and law. Being subsidiary, public means of regulation should be used according to the principle of minimum necessity. Such an approach will lead to a reduction in the institutional costs of the free activity of individuals.

Introduction. The article deals with the specifics of the formation of postclassical natural law thought in the Anglo-American philosophy of law of the mid-twentieth century. The early theoretical heritage of Lon L. Fuller is examined through the optics of postclassical understanding: the critique of the methodological framework of classical legal positivism and the author’s attempt to propose an integrative approach that overcomes the distinction between morality and law are analysed.

Methodology and materials. The research is carried out within the framework of the conceptual scheme “classics-postclassics” used to interpret the styles of legal thinking. The methods of hermeneutic analysis, historical-philosophical reconstruction and comparative approach were used. The analysis is centred on L. L. Fuller’s early texts published in the 1940s–1950s.

Results. It is demonstrated that Fuller’s ideas — criticism of Hume’s “guillotine”, emphasis on the purpose of law, the project of eunomics — stylistically correspond to the postclassical type of rationality. Fuller’s philosophy of law project proposes a restoration of the connection between description and evaluation in law, and connects moral normativity to social reality. Interpreting Fuller within a postclassical paradigm allows to rethink his contribution to debates on the nature of law, legitimacy and justice.

Conclusion. The article demonstrates the heuristic utility of the concept of postclassical legal understanding for analysing Anglo-American philosophy of law. The approach provides a deeper interpretation of key theoretical works of the past and reveals new connections between the history of legal thought and contemporary issues in the philosophy of law.

Introduction. The functional approach is an effective heuristic tool for understanding the mechanisms of legal doctrine. The choice of a functional approach is of particular relevance due to the autopoietic nature of legal communication. However, the functions of legal doctrine are not yet sufficiently conceptualized within the framework of the post-neoclassical paradigm. The article analyzes and summarizes the interpretations of the functions of legal doctrine in domestic science, establishes the structure and clarifies the composition of the functions of legal doctrine in the context of the post-nonclassical paradigm. The functioning of the doctrine as a doctrinal factor of legal communication is shown on the example of the medieval doctrine of Jus commune.

Methodology and materials. The study is based on the post-non-classical paradigm and the communicative theory of law by A. V. Polyakov, systemic, structural-functional approaches, comparative, formal-logical methods. The research materials include special scientific publications on the problems of legal doctrine, general works on the theory of systems and methodology of scientific research, and actual material from the history of law.

Results and discussion. The structure of the functions of legal doctrine includes the subject (carries out activities), the object (experiences the impact), the activity (processes within the activity) and the purpose of such activity. The functioning of the doctrine in legal communication occurs in the form of a doctrinal factor through four functions that affect different objects of legal reality: 1) selective (selection and endowment of certain social facts with the status of legal relevance), 2) meaning-forming (conditioning the processes of legitimation and interpretation occurring in the minds of subjects), 3) prescriptive (establishment of rules of conduct by the doctrine), 4) constitutive (organization and development - construction - of the legal system).

Conclusions. The study formulates the general parameters of the doctrinal factor of legal communication: the functioning of the doctrine is cumulative, combines three aspects of the objectification of the doctrinal factor (textual, cognitive and praxiological), is cyclical and renewable. The possibility of instrumental application of the structure of functions determines the practical significance of the study. Prospects for further research are related to the analysis of the action of other legal texts through a functional approach.

Introduction. The article is devoted to the consideration of four theses of the famous scientist B. Melkevik. The attitude of researchers to his ideas is polar: from recognition of him as an outstanding thinker to harsh criticism of his views. We will discuss their points of view and present our view on the ideas of this Norwegian-Canadian thinker. The chosen topic has not been the subject of a special analysis.

Methodology and materials. When writing this text, logical methods of analysis and synthesis, methodological methods of doctrinal interpretation of Melkevik’s four key propositions and his work “Philosophy of law in the current of modernity” are used. We also studied the following works by the scholar: “Why is it necessary to study the philosophy of law?”, “Legitimacy and Human rights”, “Marxism and the philosophy of law: Bazukanis as a model”, “Why Individual Freedom and the Autonomy of Law Stand or Fall Together” (co-author — O. Melkevik, “The strong rule of law state: how to resist modern destructive authoritarianism”, “Legal epistemology and already-law”, “Jurgen Habermas and the Theory of communicative action”, “Habermas and Rolls”, etc. We used the works by M. V. Antonov, V. I. Kruss, V. V.Ogleznev, A. V. Polyakov and others. We believe that the information we have allows us to draw certain conclusions.

Research results and their discussion. Four propositions by B. Melkevik are analyzed: to free oneself from the task of dictating the rules of doctrinal creativity; the philosophy of law must free oneself from the trap of statism; it is necessary to take seriously the autonomy of individuals; the philosophy of law must refuse from funding. At the end of the article, conclusions are drawn and the author’s position is formulated.

Conclusions. The main result is that what B. Melkevik calls graves for the modern philosophy of law, we would call risks. His concept is the understanding of law through the communication of individuals, intersubjective relations with their freedom and in compliance with democratic procedures and procedural restrictions. Law according to B. Melkevik is an art applied in practice. Individuals should be the masters of law.

Introduction. The article is devoted to the consideration of law from the point of view of two types of communication — communication of the type «From Me — to an Other» and communication of the type «From Me — to Me», also called «self-communication».

Methodology and materials. The research is based on the works of russian and foreign scientists who consider law as a manifestation of communication, as well as the work of communication theorist Yu. M. Lotman. The research method is based on the identification of «ideal types» of communication, which make it possible to consider law as their manifestation, to analyze particular features of law as typical characteristics of a particular «ideal type» of communication.

Results and discussion. In order to consider law in the light of the ideal-type characteristics of various types of communication, three issues were elaborated: 1) understanding of law as a «From Me — to an Other» type of communication, which forms the basis of a significant number of modern studies; 2) the essence of self-communication as a type of communication that leads to the appearance of new information without direct interaction of an individual with another one and in this sense opposes to communication of «From Me — to an Other» type; 3) the application of the idea of self-communication to explanation of the characteristic features of law as a mechanism of normative regulation of social order.

Conclusions. As the study showed, despite the widespread tendency to consider law from the point of view of the «From Me — to an Other» type of communication, it is self-communication of «From Me — to Me» type, seemingly far from legal regulation, that turns out to be quite close to the essence of law in terms of its ideal-type manifestations. As far as law is the most important mechanism for stabilizing social processes, one of the most important factors for stabilization and development of law itself will be its interpretation in terms of self-communication.

Introduction. Postclassical jurisprudence is characterized by the integration of an analytical and empirical approach to researches, which has been notably evident in recent decades. Legal realism combines the theories of natural law and exclusive positivism within the framework of an updated version of the sociological legal understanding. Relying on empirical data in law makes it possible to prepare future lawyers for practical work and develop the skills necessary to advocate equality in access to justice and fairness in the issuance of law enforcement acts.

Methodology and materials. The research is based on descriptive, formal-logical and comparativelegal methods. When comparing the phenomena of law and legal order, the methods of structural and system analysis are used. The analysis of the usage of the term “Russian legal realism” introduced in 2012 is carried out, including the need to separate it from such concepts as “St. Petersburg School of Law”, “L. I. Petrazhitsky’s Psychological School of law”, “Russian legal thought of the late XIX – early XX century”. A comparative study of Russian, American and Scandinavian variants of legal realism is made, and on its basis the affiliation of realistic jurisprudence in Russia to the postclassical paradigm is substantiated.

Research results and their discussion. The processes of formation and evolution of the concept of Russian legal realism are examined, philosophical and legal views that have influenced the modern legal order are comprehended. It is established that the formation of Soviet law took place under the dominance of the psychological theory of law, actualizing the value of personality in history.

Conclusions. The role of the postclassical research program in the comprehensive understanding of legal phenomena is confirmed. The foundations of the concept of Russian legal realism are articulated. A new approach to the relationship between the phenomena of law and law and order is proposed, the structure of law and order is substantiated, which contains, along with normative legal acts, a body of law enforcement acts, educational institutions of a legal profile, and public authorities that create and apply legal regulations.