Moral-legal self-regulation of freedom of conscience: culturological aspect

Keywords: freedom of conscience, conscience, moral-legal self-regulation, legal culture, tolerance.

Abstract

The purpose of the article is to analyze the possibility of combining legal and moral regulations in the implementation of the human right to freedom of conscience. The methodological basis of the study reveals the interdisciplinary of the problem. Culturological analysis of freedom of conscience is performed by using philosophical-anthropological and phenomenological approaches to identify the specifics of legal culture, the role of conscience in the moral and legal self-regulation of human. Systemic method is used for analysis freedom of conscience as a complex holistic phenomenon; historical method and comparative-legal method – for identification of the specifics of the legal regulation of freedom of conscience in historical retrospect and perspective. Scientific novelty. Freedom of conscience is revealed as a phenomenon of legal culture which involves the moral-legal self-regulation of people. As a manifestation of social self-organization the legal culture forms a tolerant communicative space, in which the actually legal regulation of freedom of conscience is supplemented by mechanism of the moral self-regulation of a person – conscience. It is substantiated that transformation of the law to a legal culture requires not only human trust in the law, but also the legal trust in a conscientious person.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

Irina Donnikova, National University «Odessa Maritime Academy» Ukraine.

Doctor of Philosophical Science, Associate Professor, Head of the Department of Philosophy, National University «Odessa Maritime Academy» Ukraine.

Andrii Kovban, National University «Odessa Maritime Academy», Odesa, Ukraine.

Associate Professor, PhD in Law, National University «Odessa Maritime Academy», Odesa, Ukraine.

References

Annabi, A., & Jalali, M. (2018). Study The Evolution Of International Environmental Law. Amazonia Investiga, 7(13), 72-81.

Babij, M. (1994). Freedom of conscience: philosophical-anthropological and religious comprehension. Ukraine: Institute of Political and Ethnonational Studies, National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine.

Babij, M. (2013). State and Church: Theoretical and Practical Dimensions of Modern Relations. The state and the church in the recent history of Ukraine. Coll. Science. Works “State and Church in the new histories of Ukraine”, Ukraine: Poltava V.G. Korolenko National Pedagogical University, 64-75.

Bowie, F. (2008). Anthropology of Religion. Religion Compass 2(5):862 – 874. DOI: https://doi.org/ 10.1111/j.1749-8171.2008.00091.x

Brown, W. (2006). Regulating aversion: tolerance in the age of identity and empire. Princeton University Press.

Dein, S. (2013). How Useful is ‘Religious Belief’ in the Anthropology of Religion? Anthropology 2. Doi: https://doi.org/10.4172/2332-0915.1000e116

Donnikova, I. (2018). Moral Search in Multicultural Communication. Anthropological Measurements of Philosophical Research. NO 14, 30-41. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15802/ampr.v0i14.150545.

Donnikova, I. A. (2011). The culture-genic essence of social self-organization. Printing House.

Goodale, M. (2017). Anthropology and Law: A Critical Introduction. New York University Press, New York. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctt1ggjjgh

Gromov, V. E. (2014). From the Ethics of Justice and Suffering to the Spiritual Ethics of a Free, Unconditional Personality. Anthropological Dimensions of Philosophical Research. Vol. 6, 54-63. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15802/ampr2014/35663.

Kovban, A., Kohut, I. (2019). Formation of a Corporate Social Responsibility Strategy of Companies in EU Countries. Baltic Journal of Economic Studies. Vol 5, No 3 (2019). P. 82-90. DOI: https://doi.org/10.30525/2256-0742/2019-5-3-82-90

Krymsky, S. (2013). Tolerance as Civilization Strategy of the XXI Century. Tolerance and dialogue in the modern world. Coll. Science. Works “Philosophical Dialogues’2013”, Vol. 7, 20-28.

Levinas, E. (1999). Between us: research. Opinion-about-another. Spirit and Letter.

Malakhov, V. (2013). The problem of incompatibility of cultural values. Tolerance and dialogue in the modern world. Coll. Science. works «Philosophical dialogues2013, K., 29-40.

Martynjuk, Je., Nykytchenko, O. (2009). Freedom of conscience: ghermenev aspect. Current problems of state and law. Vyp. 50, 299-304. – Rezhym dostupu: http://nbuv.gov.ua/UJRN/apdp_2009_50_48.

Myshchak, I. (2019). Constitutional and legal guarantees of religious freedom in Ukraine: some shortcomings and gaps in current legislation. Constitutional process in Ukraine: political and legal aspects. No 10 (66). 3-7.

Nelken, D. (2012). Using Legal Culture. Wildy, Simmonds and Hill, London. 1-51.

Perry, M. (2014). Freedom of Conscience as Religious and Moral Freedom. Journal of law and religion, 29(1), 124-141. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1017/jlr.2013.

Polyakov, A. V. (2012). Anthropological and Communicative Justification of Human Rights. Human rights before the challenges of the XXI century. RAPN, ROSSPEN, 29-49.

Swan K., Vallier, K. (2012). The Normative Significance of Conscience. Journal Of Ethics & Social Philosophy . Vol. 6, No. 3. 22 р.

Yarmol, L. (2006). Freedom of religion: legal support in Ukraine (general theoretical research). Lviv: Ivan Franko National University of Lviv.
Published
2020-09-08
How to Cite
Donnikova, I., & Kovban, A. (2020). Moral-legal self-regulation of freedom of conscience: culturological aspect. Amazonia Investiga, 9(32), 28-35. https://doi.org/10.34069/AI/2020.32.08.3
Section
Articles