CLASSICAL AND CHRONODISCRETE MONO-GEOGRAPHICAL COMPARATIVE JURISPRUDENCE: GENERAL AND SPECIFIC

Abstract

In modern comparative jurisprudence, two parallel directions have emerged: classical comparative jurisprudence and chronodiscrete mono-geographical comparative jurisprudence. Since chronodiscrete mono-geographical comparative jurisprudence is a relatively young area, it is advisable to compare it with classical comparative jurisprudence. Research purpose: to identify general and specific features in the two mentioned areas of modern comparative jurisprudence. Methods: comparative analysis, analytical method, method of scientific generalizations. Results: the article establishes the similarity of classical and chronodiscrete mono-geographical comparative jurisprudence, manifested in the use of the comparison method as the main scientific method, in the presence of a cognitive research goal. The main differences are identified, consisting primarily in the object and level of research (within the framework of classical comparative jurisprudence, legal families, legal systems of different states and elements of legal systems are compared, and within the framework of chronodiscrete mono-geographical comparative jurisprudence, the comparison of similar institutions, processes, phenomena, ideas, concepts, principles that took place in different historical periods in one country in the conditions of interruption of historical tradition is carried out), in the mandatory presence of a pragmatic goal and the mandatory use of the periodization method in chronodiscrete research; the impossibility of using in chronodiscrete research a number of methods of scientific knowledge (sociological, legal experiment, etc.) applicable in classical comparative legal research.

Keywords

• comparative jurisprudence
• classical comparative jurisprudence
• chronodiscrete monogeographical comparative jurisprudence
• methodology
• comparison method
• periodization method