Empirical Jurisprudence Of Modern Times And Science Of The Late Middle Ages: Some Observations On Parallels And Intersections On A New Branch Of Knowledge

Abstract

Scientific and technological progress is increasingly forcing modern researchers in social sciences to turn to the definition of methodological principles and criteria for the addition of new scientific knowledge. After all, the solution of legal problems, which is based only on the dogma of the formal legal method, makes it impossible to predict further development of social processes, and most importantly give them the desired direction of movement to increase new qualitative knowledge. In this regard, the article argues that in order to fully disclose the essence of legal life, jurisprudence must return to the analysis of empirical facts, that reflect social processes and at the same time drive the improvement of legal regulation mechanisms. In order to prove the usefulness of empirical generalizations for the growth of new knowledge in jurisprudence in particular on the example of some disciplines aimed at combating crime, the article refers to the achievements of European science in the XV-XVI in the field of natural science and social structure which became possible due to the systematization of a large array of empirical facts.

At the same time, the article demonstrates the paradoxical nature of some statements that are regarded in today’s legal science as axioms. The reasons for neglect of empirical facts in jurisprudence are clarified and the prospects opened up due to the development of empirical jurisprudence are analyzed. It is concluded that compliance with the postulates of empirical jurisprudence allows inter alia to organize and conduct thorough applied research in the field of law and law enforcement; to join domestic researchers to the best western traditions of proving hypotheses about positive changes in society as a result of modernization of social practice; to study in depth social processes with any degree of criminogenicity; to analyze information on criminal law statistics in combination with objective criminal reality; to perform a prognostic function, which is a prerequisite for programming the fight against crime and for rule­making activity.