UDC

141:34.01

DOI

https://doi.org/10.37482/2687-1505-V147

Authors

Il’ya V. Demin
Samara National Research University; Moskovskoe sh. 34, Samara, 443086, Russian Federation;
ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5821-3031 e-mail: ilyadem83@yandex.ru

Abstract

This article provides a comparative analysis of two interpretations and methodological strategies of substantiating the idea of natural law, which belong to Ivan Ilyin and Leo Strauss. The comparative method was used in the research process, while the problem-topic method was applied to the analysis and presentation of the material. The two interpretations of natural law were compared on the basis of the following criteria: 1) interpretation of the principle of historicism and assessment of its prospects for substantiating natural legal thinking; 2) correlation between natural and positive law; 3) interpretation of the essence of philosophy, relationship between the general understanding of the nature of philosophical knowledge and the principles of natural legal thinking; 4) correlation between law and religion. Both Ilyin and Strauss saw in natural law an invariant basis of positive law. Criticism of the principle of historicism (understood as relativism) is a conceptual prerequisite for the reactualization of the idea of natural law in the works of both philosophers. However, Ilyin sees in historicism an annoying prejudice and a product of a “sick” legal consciousness, while Strauss views historicism as the main challenge facing the classical philosophical tradition. The differences in the substantiation of natural law by the two philosophers stem from the differences in their understanding of the nature of philosophical knowledge. For Ilyin, philosophy begins with studying the meaning of axioms, while for Strauss, philosophy as “knowledge of ignorance” begins with a critical formulation and comprehension of fundamental questions. The most significant differences in the philosophical and legal concepts of Ilyin and Strauss are associated with the problem of the relationship between law and religion. According to Strauss, the universal rationaltheoretical substantiation of the idea of natural law cannot refer to religious experience and be based on revelation. According to Ilyin, the reference of the philosophy of law to religious experience is necessary, because normal legal consciousness has an essentially religious nature.

For citation: Demin I.V. The Problem of Natural Law in the Works of Ivan Ilyin and Leo Strauss. Vestnik Severnogo (Arkticheskogo) federal’nogo universiteta. Ser.: Gumanitarnye i sotsial’nye nauki, 2021, vol. 21, no. 6, pp. 105–119. DOI: 10.37482/2687-1505-V147

Keywords

natural law, positive law, Ivan Ilyin’s philosophy of law, Leo Strauss’ political philosophy, legal consciousness, classical philosophy, historicism, relativism

References

1. Walicki A. Legal Philosophies of Russian Liberalism. Oxford, 1987. 480 p. (Russ. ed.: Valitskiy A. Filosofiya prava russkogo liberalizma. Moscow, 2012. 567 p.).
2. Zhukov V.N. Russkaya filosofiya prava: ot ratsionalizma k mistitsizmu [Russian Philosophy of Law: From Rationalism to Mysticism]. Moscow, 2017. 352 p.
3. Ilyin I.A. Ponyatie prava i sily (Opyt metodologicheskogo analiza) [The Notion of Law and Force (a Methodological Analysis)]. Voprosy filosofii i psikhologii, 1910, book 101, pp. 1–38.
4. Ilyin I.A. O sushchnosti pravosoznaniya [On the Essence of Legal Consciousness]. Ilyin I.A. Sobranie sochineniy [Collected Works]. Vol. 4. Moscow, 1994, pp. 149–414.
5. Kartsov A.S. Pravovaya ideologiya russkogo konservatizma [Legal Ideology of Russian Conservatism]. Moscow, 1999. 224 p.
6. Evlampiev I.I. Filosofskie i pravovye vzglyady I.A. Il’ina [Philosophical and Legal Views of Ivan Ilyin]. Izvestiya vysshikh uchebnykh zavedeniy. Pravovedenie, 1992, no. 3, pp. 81–93.
7. Okara A.N. Pravosoznanie – tsentral’naya kategoriya filosofii prava I.A. Il’ina [Legal Consciousness as a Central Category in Ivan Ilyin’s Philosophy of Law]. Gosudarstvo i pravo, 1999, no. 6, pp. 84–93.
8. Vakulinskaya A.I. Teoreticheskie aspekty filosofii prava I.A. Il’ina v kontekste russkoy traditsii ponimaniya prava [Aspects of Ivan Ilyin’s Philosophy of Law and Russian Tradition of Understanding Law]. Istoriya filosofii, 2018, vol. 23, no. 1, pp. 96–107.
9. Vakulinskaya A.I. Ideya prava v filosofii I.A. Il’ina [The Idea of Law in Ivan Ilyin’s Philosophy: Diss.]. Moscow, 2019. 187 p.
10. Strauss L. Political Philosophy and History. J. Hist. Ideas, 1949, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 30–50. DOI: 10.2307/2707198
11. Strauss L. Natural Right and the Historical Approach. Rev. Politics, 1950, vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 422–442.
12. Strauss L. The Origin of the Idea of Natural Right. Soc. Res., 1952, vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 23–60.
13. Smith S.B. Reading Leo Strauss: Politics, Philosophy, Judaism. Chicago, 2006. 269 p.
14. Tarcov N. Philosophy and History: Tradition and Interpretation in the Work of Leo Strauss. Polity, 1983, vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 5–29. DOI: 10.2307/3234520
15. Pangle T.L. Leo Strauss: An Introduction to His Thought and Intellectual Legacy. Baltimore, 2006. 189 p.
16. Janssens D. Between Athens and Jerusalem: Philosophy, Prophecy, and Politics in Leo Strauss’s Early Thought. Albany, 2008. 274 p.
17. Dmitriev T. Spor ob osnovakh politicheskogo: Leo Shtraus versus Karl Shmitt [The Debate About the Foundations of the Political; Or, Leo Strauss versus Carl Schmitt]. Sotsiologicheskoe obozrenie, 2012, vol. 11, no. 3, pp. 26–40.
18. Norton A. Leo Strauss and the Politics of American Empire. New Haven, 2004. 235 p.
19. Pavlov A.V. Osnovaniya neokonservatizma [Origins of Neoconservatism]. Tetradi po konservatizmu, 2016, no. 1, pp. 101–116.
20. Blokhin K.V. Leo Shtraus i ego neokonservativnye posledovateli (k probleme istochnikov i genezisa neokonservatizma) [Leo Strauss and His Neoconservative Disciples (on the Problem of the Sources and Genesis of Neoconservatism)]. Vestnik Rossiyskogo universiteta druzhby narodov. Ser.: Politologiya, 2019, vol. 21, no. 4, pp. 729–744. DOI: 10.22363/2313-1438-2019-21-4-729-744
21. Demin I.V. Printsip istorizma v postmetafizicheskom kontekste [The Principle of Historicism in a Post-Metaphysical Context]. Filosofskie nauki, 2016, no. 12, pp. 34–44.
22. Strauss L. Chto takoe politicheskaya filosofiya? [What Is Political Philosophy?]. Strauss L. Vvedenie v politicheskuyu filosofiyu [An Introduction to Political Philosophy]. Moscow, 2000, pp. 9–49.
23. Demin I.V. Kritika istorizma v filosofskoy kontseptsii Leo Shtrausa [Criticism of Historicism in Leo Strauss’ Philosophical Conception]. Nauchnyy ezhegodnik Instituta filosofii i prava Ural’skogo otdeleniya RAN, 2017, vol. 17, no. 3, pp. 22–36. DOI: 10.17506/ryipl.2016.17.3.2236
24. Strauss L. Estestvennoe pravo i istoriya [Natural Right and History]. Moscow, 2007. 312 p.
25. Ilyin I.A. Filosofiya Gegelya kak uchenie o konkretnosti Boga i cheloveka [The Philosophy of Hegel as a Doctrine of the Concreteness of God and Humanity]. St. Petersburg, 1994. 541 p.
26. Evlampiev I.I. Bozhestvennoe i chelovecheskoe v filosofii Ivana Il’ina [The Divine and the Human in Ivan Ilyin’s Philosophy]. St. Petersburg, 1998. 509 p.
27. Evlampiev I.I. Ivan Ilyin. St. Petersburg, 2016. 251 p. (in Russ.).
28. Ilyin I.A. Osnovnye zadachi pravovedeniya v Rossii [The Main Tasks of Jurisprudence in Russia]. Russkaya mysl’, 1922, book 8–12, pp. 162–188.
29. Strauss L. Vzaimnoe vliyanie filosofii i teologii [The Mutual Influence of Theology and Philosophy]. Strauss L. Vvedenie v politicheskuyu filosofiyu [An Introduction to Political Philosophy]. Moscow, 2000, pp. 294–309.