.
Philosophy of Law
Study Course Description
Course Description Statuss:Approved
Course Description Version:9.00
Study Course Accepted:08.07.2024 08:58:56
| Study Course Information | |||||||||
| Course Code: | JF_028 | LQF level: | Level 6 | ||||||
| Credit Points: | 2.00 | ECTS: | 3.00 | ||||||
| Branch of Science: | Law; Theory and History of Rights | Target Audience: | Juridical Science | ||||||
| Study Course Supervisor | |||||||||
| Course Supervisor: | Agnese Beļska | ||||||||
| Study Course Implementer | |||||||||
| Structural Unit: | Faculty of Social Sciences | ||||||||
| The Head of Structural Unit: | |||||||||
| Contacts: | Dzirciema street 16, Rīga, szf rsu[pnkts]lv | ||||||||
| Study Course Planning | |||||||||
| Full-Time - Semester No.1 | |||||||||
| Lectures (count) | 10 | Lecture Length (academic hours) | 2 | Total Contact Hours of Lectures | 20 | ||||
| Classes (count) | 6 | Class Length (academic hours) | 2 | Total Contact Hours of Classes | 12 | ||||
| Total Contact Hours | 32 | ||||||||
| Part-Time - Semester No.1 | |||||||||
| Lectures (count) | 4 | Lecture Length (academic hours) | 2 | Total Contact Hours of Lectures | 8 | ||||
| Classes (count) | 1 | Class Length (academic hours) | 2 | Total Contact Hours of Classes | 2 | ||||
| Total Contact Hours | 10 | ||||||||
| Study course description | |||||||||
| Preliminary Knowledge: | Legal Theory, History of Latvian Law, Logic. | ||||||||
| Objective: | Provide students with insights into basic concepts and challenges of philosophy of law by looking at the works of the thinkers in the ancient world and comparing them to focal issues among the philosophers of law. Including the study of various traditions of the philosophical understanding of law, demonstrating the applicability of philosophy of law in research and analysis of the processes in the modern society. Their place in juridical science and research. | ||||||||
| Topic Layout (Full-Time) | |||||||||
| No. | Topic | Type of Implementation | Number | Venue | |||||
| 1 | 1. Introduction to the Philosophy of Law: 1.1. Purpose, concept and tasks. 1.2. Subject and content. 1.3. Place in philosophy and jurisprudence. 1.4. The beginnings of the legal philosophy in Europe. | Lectures | 1.00 | auditorium | |||||
| 2 | Seminar: Topic 1. Theoretical part: Understanding the Philosophy of Law. Practical part: practical work in groups. | Classes | 1.00 | auditorium | |||||
| 3 | 2. School of Natural Law: 2.1. Concept and content. 2.2. Ancient Natural law. 2.3. Medieval Natural Law. 2.4. Natural Law in Enlightenment. 2.5. Kant's contribution to the understanding of Natural Law. 2.6. The Decline of Natural Rights. 2.7. Modern Natural Law. 2.8. Natural law and the legal system of Latvia. | Lectures | 3.00 | auditorium | |||||
| 4 | Seminar: Topic 2. Theoretical part: Understanding and issues of Natural Law. Practical part: practical work in groups. | Classes | 1.00 | auditorium | |||||
| 5 | 3. Historical School of Jurisprudence: 3.1. Place in the philosophy of law. 3.2. Main representatives. 3.3. Directions. 3.4. Significance for the development of legal systems. 3.5. Criticism. 3.6. Hegel's philosophy of law. | Lectures | 1.00 | auditorium | |||||
| 6 | Seminar: Topic 3. Theoretical part: Historical understanding of law. Practical part: practical work in groups. | Classes | 1.00 | auditorium | |||||
| 7 | 4. Legal Positivism: 4.1. Classical legal positivism and its decline. 4.2. The revival of legal positivism (neo-positivism). 4.3. Criticism. | Lectures | 2.00 | auditorium | |||||
| 8 | 5. Socialism School of Law: 5.1. Concept and understanding. 5.2. Development. 5.3. Marxism. 5.4. Directions. 5.5. Criticism. | Lectures | 1.00 | auditorium | |||||
| 9 | Seminar: Topic 4.-5. Theoretical part: Positive understanding of law. The principle of a socially responsible state. Practical part: practical work in groups. | Classes | 1.00 | auditorium | |||||
| 10 | 6. Theories and issues of the philosophy of law: 6.1. Political positivism. 6.2. Other directions of thinking in the philosophy of law. 6.3. Gnoseology, axiology, ontology of law. 6.4. Legal issues. | Lectures | 2.00 | auditorium | |||||
| 11 | Seminar: Topic 1-6. Theoretical part: Course summary. Practical part: analysis of the court decision, group work, presentation of the result. | Classes | 2.00 | auditorium | |||||
| Topic Layout (Part-Time) | |||||||||
| No. | Topic | Type of Implementation | Number | Venue | |||||
| 1 | 1. Introduction to the Philosophy of Law: 1.1. Purpose, concept and tasks. 1.2. Subject and content. 1.3. Place in philosophy and jurisprudence. 1.4. The beginnings of the legal philosophy in Europe. | Lectures | 1.00 | auditorium | |||||
| 3 | 2. School of Natural Law: 2.1. Concept and content. 2.2. Ancient Natural law. 2.3. Medieval Natural Law. 2.4. Natural Law in Enlightenment. 2.5. Kant's contribution to the understanding of Natural Law. 2.6. The Decline of Natural Rights. 2.7. Modern Natural Law. 2.8. Natural law and the legal system of Latvia. | Lectures | 1.00 | auditorium | |||||
| 5 | 3. Historical School of Jurisprudence: 3.1. Place in the philosophy of law. 3.2. Main representatives. 3.3. Directions. 3.4. Significance for the development of legal systems. 3.5. Criticism. 3.6. Hegel's philosophy of law. | Lectures | 0.50 | auditorium | |||||
| 7 | 4. Legal Positivism: 4.1. Classical legal positivism and its decline. 4.2. The revival of legal positivism (neo-positivism). 4.3. Criticism. | Lectures | 1.00 | auditorium | |||||
| 8 | 5. Socialism School of Law: 5.1. Concept and understanding. 5.2. Development. 5.3. Marxism. 5.4. Directions. 5.5. Criticism. | Lectures | 0.50 | auditorium | |||||
| 11 | Seminar: Topic 1-6. Theoretical part: Course summary. Practical part: analysis of the court decision, group work, presentation of the result. | Classes | 1.00 | auditorium | |||||
| Assessment | |||||||||
| Unaided Work: | Preparing an individual written assignment according to the topics given and requirements set for during classes; independent study of the specified legal literature and practice materials; preparing final report. Final report: to be submitted during the last lecture electronically and in paper format for the check of plagiarism (the volume of the report shall be 10 – 15 pages, quotations shall not exceed ¼ of the total amount of work; the report has been drawn up in accordance with RSU requirements for drawing up papers; international and national sources shall be used). In order to evaluate the quality of the study course as a whole, the student must fill out the study course evaluation questionnaire on the Student Portal. | ||||||||
| Assessment Criteria: | The report is assessed according to a 10-point grading system. Main assessment criteria: 1) topicality of the theme, justification of choice (maximum 3 points); 2) the author’s reasoning skills (maximum 3 points); 3) conclusions, sources of information used (maximum 3 points); 4) design and lay-out in accordance with RSU requirements (1 point). Exam. | ||||||||
| Final Examination (Full-Time): | Exam (Written) | ||||||||
| Final Examination (Part-Time): | Exam (Written) | ||||||||
| Learning Outcomes | |||||||||
| Knowledge: | Upon completion of the study course “Philosophy of Law”, the student will have acquired basic knowledge about the origin, genesis and nature of law in the context of philosophy, will be able to explain the basic directions (schools) of law, as well as know the main representatives. Namely, the student will be able to explain law from the point of view of natural and positive law, will be able to explain the prerequisites for the formation of the Latvian legal system. Also, in the process of learning, the student will have acquired knowledge of how to link ancient times and the present by creating regularities. The student will have gained knowledge on how to critically evaluate the information accumulated over the centuries, selecting what is essential and necessary for solving contemporary legal problems. | ||||||||
| Skills: | Upon completion of the study course “Philosophy of Law”, the student will be able to make good use of the acquired knowledge in future professional activity; to tackle problems with understanding both from a philosophical and legal point of view; thus the student will have acquired the skills to address problems in a sequential way from different viewpoints. The student will have learned the ability to structure his/her learning process, make untraditional decisions by scientifically justifying them, defend his/her opinion both among the professionals of the sector and elsewhere. As part of the course, the student will develop skills to work not only individually, but also in a team, where different views and opinions on the prevailing processes in the society have to be faced. | ||||||||
| Competencies: | At the end of the course, the student will be competent to give a reasoned opinion on issues related to the philosophy of law. Will be able to assess the impact of their professional contribution to the philosophy of law as a branch of law. The knowledge acquired by the student in the philosophy of law will form the basis for developing the understanding of the philosophy of law nowadays. The student will be able to compile information and analyse it independently, linking it to the direction of the philosophy of law. | ||||||||
| Bibliography | |||||||||
| No. | Reference | ||||||||
| Required Reading | |||||||||
| 1 | Cipeliuss R. Tiesību būtība. Juridiskai izglītībai un praksei. – Rīga: Latvijas Universitāte, 2001. | ||||||||
| 2 | Horns N. Ievads tiesību zinātnē un tiesību filozofijā // Likums un tiesības. – 1999. Nr.1.-4.;2000. Nr.1.-8. | ||||||||
| 3 | Lejiņš P., Šulcs L. Tiesību filozofija. Rīga, 1938 | ||||||||
| Additional Reading | |||||||||
| 1 | Aristotelis. Nikomaha ētika. Pagātnes domātāju darbi. –Rīga: Zvaigzne, 1985 | ||||||||
| 2 | Bandēns G. Leģisms – senās Ķīnas valsts pārvaldes doktrīnas //Vispārīgās tiesību teorijas un valsts zinātnes atziņas. – Rīga: LU, 1997 | ||||||||
| 3 | Bēkons F. Jaunais orgānus. Pagātnes domātāju darbi. – Rīga: Zvaigzne, 1989 | ||||||||
| 4 | Boazs D. Pasaules filozofiskā doma labklājības meklējumos. – Rīga: Biznesa augstskola Turība, 2006.. | ||||||||
| 5 | Broks J. Tiesību filosofija. –Rīga: Biznesa augstskola Turība, 2004. | ||||||||
| 6 | Dāle P. Imanuels Kants. – Rīga: Valters un Rapa. 1936. | ||||||||
| 7 | Dišlers K. Latvijas valsts varas orgāni un viņu funkcijas. – Rīga: Tiesu namu aģentūra, 2004 | ||||||||
| 8 | Domas par antīko filozofiju. – Rīga: Avots, 1990. | ||||||||
| 9 | Freibahs L. Kristietības būtība. Nākotnes filozofijas pamati. Pagātnes domātāju darbi. 2.papildizdevums. – Rīga: Zvaigzne, 1991 | ||||||||
| 10 | Fihte J.G. Cilvēka būtība. Par cilvēka lielumu. Pagātnes domātāju darbi. – Rīga: Zvaigzne, 1989 | ||||||||
| 11 | Fuko M. Uzraudzīt un sodīt. – Rīga: Omnia mea, 2001. | ||||||||
| 12 | Kants I. Prolegomeni. Pagātnes domātāju darbi. – Rīga: Zvaigzne, 1990 | ||||||||
| 13 | Krastiņš I. Tiesību Doktrīnas. – Rīga: LU, 1996 | ||||||||
| 14 | Lazdiņš, J. Vēsturiskā tiesību skola un Latvija. Latvijas Universitātes raksti, 2006. Nr.703, 21.-43.lpp. | ||||||||
| 15 | Kūle M., Kūlis R. Filosofija. – Rīga: Zvaigzne ABC, 1998. | ||||||||
| 16 | Levits E. Par līdztiesību likuma un tiesas priekšā, un diskriminācijas aizliegumu. Par Satversmes 91.pantu. // portāls politika.lv -19.10.2004. | ||||||||
| 17 | Makjavelli N. Valdnieks. – Rīga: Tapals, 2007 | ||||||||
| 18 | Meļķisis E. Attīstības tendences dažādos tiesību teorijas un prakses jautājumos. – Rīga: Latvijas Universitāte, 2000. | ||||||||
| 19 | Neimanis J. Ievads tiesībās. Rīga: Ratio iuris, 2005 | ||||||||
| 20 | Osipova S. Musulmaņu tiesību vēsture viduslaikos. – Rīga: LU, 2001 | ||||||||
| 21 | Osipova S. Tiesību socioloģija kā juridiskā zinātne un tās ģenēze. // Juridiskā zinātne. Latvijas Universitātes raksti Nr.703. Rīga: LU, 2006 | ||||||||
| 22 | Platons. Valsts. - Rīga: Zvaigzne ABC, 2001; | ||||||||
| 23 | Razs Dž. Brīvības morāle. – Rīga: Sorosa fonds Latvija, 2001 | ||||||||
| 24 | Sūlcs L. Tiesību idejas un dabisko tiesību problēmas Kanta tiesību teorijā. – Rīga: Valters un Rapa, 1939 | ||||||||
| 25 | Šarls Luijs de Monteksjē, Persiešu vēstules. Pagātnes domātāju darbi. – Rīga: Zvagzne, 1990 | ||||||||
| 26 | Šulcs L. Dabisko tiesību evolūcija. Tiesību ministrijas vēstnesis. – Nr.5/6, 1934 | ||||||||
| 27 | Šulcs, L. Tiesību idejas un dabisko tiesību problēmas Kanta tiesību teorijā. – Rīga: Valters un Rapa, 1939. | ||||||||
| 28 | Ziemele, I. Starptautiskās tiesības un cilvēktiesības Latvijā: abstrakcija vai realitāte. – Rīga: Tiesu namu aģentūra, 2005. | ||||||||
| 29 | Vedins I. Likuma ontoloģija. // Raksti Nr.8 – Rīga: Policijas akadēmija, 2001 | ||||||||
| 30 | Ackermann B.A. Social Justice in the Liberal State. – London: Yale University press, 1980 | ||||||||
| 31 | Ārvalstu: | ||||||||
| 32 | Adams D.M. Philosophical problems in the Law; 3rd edition. – Canada: Wadsworth, 1999 | ||||||||
| 33 | Dworkin R. Taking Rights Seriously. –London: Duckworth, 1978 | ||||||||
| 34 | Eisenberg M.A. The Nature of the common law. – England: [b.v.], 1998 | ||||||||
| 35 | Feinberg J. Philosophy of Law. 6th ed. – Wadsworth: [b.i.],2000 | ||||||||
| 36 | Frederik G. Kempin, Jr.Historical Introduction to Anglo – American Law. – St.Paul: Back’s Law dictionary, - 1998 | ||||||||
| 37 | Professional Responsibility and regulation. Deborah L. Rhode, Geoffrey C. Hazard, Foundation Press, NY, 2002 | ||||||||
| 38 | Shaklee I. N. Law and Politics//legism. - Cambridge: Hardvard University Press, 1986 | ||||||||
| 39 | Zippelius R. . Rechtsphilosophie. 4.Auflag.Munchen: Verlag C.H.Beck, 2003 | ||||||||
| Other Information Sources | |||||||||
| 1 | Cilvēktiesību un pamatbrīvību aizsardzības konvencija | ||||||||
| 2 | Neimane I. Īpašuma tiesības kā cilvēka pamattiesības // portāls politika.lv, 09.05.2005. | ||||||||
| 3 | What are human rights? | ||||||||
| 4 | Ierosinātās un izskatītās Satversmes tiesas lietas. | ||||||||
| 5 | Augstākās Tiesas mājaslapa. | ||||||||
