{"title":"民法统计","authors":"V. A. Boldyrev","doi":"10.33397/2619-0559-2021-3-3-232-256","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: comparison of dissertations in civil law with dissertations in other legal specialties, especially the criminal law cycle, inevitably leads to the idea that there are no fundamental civil law works in Russian legal science, which would be based on a statistical analysis of empirical material. Dissertation candidates often confirm or deny by one or another case or a set of them their idea, which has real or imaginary scientific value. Often, the study of a wide group of cases becomes the foundation for deep scientific conclusions, changes in the initial views of the dissertation candidate or the proposal of new hypotheses, however, in these cases, the authors’ observations are not statistical. The very statement about the insufficient use of statistical methods in civil law science requires not just a declaration with an indication of its obviousness, but direct evidence of this circumstance. Purpose: to confirm or refute the thesis about the rare use of statistical methods in civil law research, to establish the reasons for the rare use (if the thesis is confirmed). Methods: formal logical methods, statistical methods, comparative method are used. Results: the thesis about the rare use of statistical methods in civil law research is confirmed. The index of the objective conditionality of the use of statistical methods in legal research is proposed. The index shows that the role of the conditionally subjective component, that is, the established traditions of conducting scientific research in various specialties, is important, but not decisive for characterizing the methodological foundations of conducting scientific research. The choice by a particular researcher of statistical methods of conducting scientific work is determined by two main quantitative parameters of conducting research work by the entire scientific community in the relevant specialty: (a) the breadth of the sector of the analyzed legal reality, including the volume of legislation regulating public relations; (b) the number of researchers working in the relevant field.","PeriodicalId":33643,"journal":{"name":"Metodologicheskie problemy tsivilisticheskikh issledovanii","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"THE CIVIL LAW STATISTICS\",\"authors\":\"V. A. Boldyrev\",\"doi\":\"10.33397/2619-0559-2021-3-3-232-256\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Introduction: comparison of dissertations in civil law with dissertations in other legal specialties, especially the criminal law cycle, inevitably leads to the idea that there are no fundamental civil law works in Russian legal science, which would be based on a statistical analysis of empirical material. Dissertation candidates often confirm or deny by one or another case or a set of them their idea, which has real or imaginary scientific value. Often, the study of a wide group of cases becomes the foundation for deep scientific conclusions, changes in the initial views of the dissertation candidate or the proposal of new hypotheses, however, in these cases, the authors’ observations are not statistical. The very statement about the insufficient use of statistical methods in civil law science requires not just a declaration with an indication of its obviousness, but direct evidence of this circumstance. Purpose: to confirm or refute the thesis about the rare use of statistical methods in civil law research, to establish the reasons for the rare use (if the thesis is confirmed). Methods: formal logical methods, statistical methods, comparative method are used. Results: the thesis about the rare use of statistical methods in civil law research is confirmed. The index of the objective conditionality of the use of statistical methods in legal research is proposed. The index shows that the role of the conditionally subjective component, that is, the established traditions of conducting scientific research in various specialties, is important, but not decisive for characterizing the methodological foundations of conducting scientific research. The choice by a particular researcher of statistical methods of conducting scientific work is determined by two main quantitative parameters of conducting research work by the entire scientific community in the relevant specialty: (a) the breadth of the sector of the analyzed legal reality, including the volume of legislation regulating public relations; (b) the number of researchers working in the relevant field.\",\"PeriodicalId\":33643,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Metodologicheskie problemy tsivilisticheskikh issledovanii\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Metodologicheskie problemy tsivilisticheskikh issledovanii\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.33397/2619-0559-2021-3-3-232-256\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Metodologicheskie problemy tsivilisticheskikh issledovanii","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.33397/2619-0559-2021-3-3-232-256","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

导言:将民法专业的论文与其他法律专业的论文进行比较,特别是与刑法周期的论文进行比较,不可避免地会导致这样一种观点,即俄罗斯法学中没有基础的民法著作,这将基于对经验材料的统计分析。论文候选人经常通过一个或另一个或一组案例来证实或否认他们的想法,这些想法具有真实或想象的科学价值。通常,对大量案例的研究成为深入科学结论的基础,论文候选人最初观点的变化或新假设的提出,然而,在这些情况下,作者的观察结果不是统计的。关于民法科学中统计方法使用不足的陈述不仅需要声明其明显性,而且需要对此情况的直接证据。目的:证实或反驳关于统计方法在民法研究中很少使用的论点,确立统计方法很少使用的原因(如果论点得到证实)。方法:采用形式逻辑方法、统计学方法、比较法。结果:证实了统计方法在民法研究中罕见运用的理论。提出了统计方法在法学研究中应用的客观条件指标。该指数表明,有条件的主观成分,即在各个专业进行科学研究的既定传统,在表征开展科学研究的方法基础方面的作用很重要,但不是决定性的。特定研究人员选择进行科学工作的统计方法取决于整个科学界在有关专业进行研究工作的两个主要数量参数:(a)所分析的法律现实部门的广度,包括规范公共关系的立法的数量;(b)在有关领域工作的研究人员人数。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
THE CIVIL LAW STATISTICS
Introduction: comparison of dissertations in civil law with dissertations in other legal specialties, especially the criminal law cycle, inevitably leads to the idea that there are no fundamental civil law works in Russian legal science, which would be based on a statistical analysis of empirical material. Dissertation candidates often confirm or deny by one or another case or a set of them their idea, which has real or imaginary scientific value. Often, the study of a wide group of cases becomes the foundation for deep scientific conclusions, changes in the initial views of the dissertation candidate or the proposal of new hypotheses, however, in these cases, the authors’ observations are not statistical. The very statement about the insufficient use of statistical methods in civil law science requires not just a declaration with an indication of its obviousness, but direct evidence of this circumstance. Purpose: to confirm or refute the thesis about the rare use of statistical methods in civil law research, to establish the reasons for the rare use (if the thesis is confirmed). Methods: formal logical methods, statistical methods, comparative method are used. Results: the thesis about the rare use of statistical methods in civil law research is confirmed. The index of the objective conditionality of the use of statistical methods in legal research is proposed. The index shows that the role of the conditionally subjective component, that is, the established traditions of conducting scientific research in various specialties, is important, but not decisive for characterizing the methodological foundations of conducting scientific research. The choice by a particular researcher of statistical methods of conducting scientific work is determined by two main quantitative parameters of conducting research work by the entire scientific community in the relevant specialty: (a) the breadth of the sector of the analyzed legal reality, including the volume of legislation regulating public relations; (b) the number of researchers working in the relevant field.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊最新文献
LEGAL MODELING AS A METHOD OF CIVIL RESEARCH ON THE METHODOLOGICAL POTENTIAL OF THE THEORY OF SYSTEMIC ORGANIZATION OF INTERSECTORAL RELATIONS OF CIVIL LAW: TO THE ANNIVERSARY OF M.IU. CHELYSHEV PHILOSOPHICAL BATTLE AGAINST MORAL HAZARD: DO WE NEED LAW METHODOLOGY CHANGE FROM “ALL OR NOTHING PRINCIPLE” TO “PRINCIPLE OF PROPORTIONALITY”? THE CONCEPT OF GOOD GOVERNANCE IN THE EU LEGISLATION: ANALYSIS IN THE CONTEXT OF METHODOLOGY OF THE CIVIL LAW RESEARCH ADDITIONAL CONCLUSION ON A DISSERTATION
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1