What is right? Just about the complex

Modern relations in society are inconceivable withoutestablishing certain norms of interaction, which sometimes take very complex forms. Therefore, the question naturally arises about what is this right and how much is it necessary?

Many views on a single

The classical formulation, obliged to giveexplanations of what this law is, says: "This is a community of norms recognized by society and the state, designed to regulate relations in them." The definition is quite vague and does not include all aspects of such a complex phenomenon. Therefore, it needs to be adjusted.

Throughout the existence of the humancivilization, people tried to establish a framework of permissible behavior. In the beginning, these were the customs; rules resulting from repeated use. After their decision came the decision of the leaders, who with the advent of the state were transformed into laws. Proceeding from this logical sequence, it can be concluded that law is a set of customs, decisions and laws. Again, the definition is controversial, since the interstate aspect of the relationship is excluded, as, for example, military or commercial. And, therefore, whole "layers" of regulators, such as, for example, international commercial law, remain out of attention. In this case, it is better to turn to theories explaining the essence of law.

Theory of Law - 5 scientific views on the problem

Lawyers still do not have a common opinionwhat is right. For this period of time, 5 main theories are widely used in science, which are successfully applied in the modern world.

Psychological theory of law. Represents the given phenomenon from the point of viewdivision into a positive and intuitive right. So, a positive right is all norms of behavior emanating from the state and its structures. Intuitive is a reaction, a certain effective relation of the individual to the established rules. Accordingly, the right appears here in the role of a certain cultural regulator of relations.

The natural-legal theory. It is based on the fact that the law shouldrepresent a set of such norms, which are a reflection of the just principles of human nature. This theory divided law and law, a positive and natural principle in law, and laid the principle of morality in law.

Normativistic theory It also determined that the law - it's just the norms established by the state and its structures.

Positivist theory believes that the answer to the question of what isright, can be the formulation: the right is the imperious will of the state. In contrast to the previous theory, in which the norms of law include and natural rights, in this particular individual acts as a derivative subject from the state.

Socialist theory states that the right is inherently onlythe material consolidation of the emerging social relations, regardless of the national or geographical factor. Therefore, all participants and their subjective rights and obligations should be included in the phenomenon under consideration.

As can be seen, in all five theories are containedseparate elements reflecting the real situation in the field of jurisprudence. However, none of them gives an exact answer to the question asked. And therefore it seems right to combine them.

So, so what's right? It is a mechanism based on natural human rights, regulation of its relations with other people and the state through fixed binding norms.

</ p>