Dialectics and Logics in Forensic Enquiry of Construction Facilities

  • Andrey Yurievich BUTYRIN The Russian Federal Center of Forensic Science of the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation, Moscow
  • Ekaterina Borisovna STATIVA The Russian Federal Center of Forensic Science of the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation, Moscow

Abstract

The main goal of this article is to develop measures related to ensuring harmonic development of scientific and methodological, and conceptual and categorical frameworks of the construction expert. Based on the results of generalization and analysis of the practice of forensic and construction and technical enquiry, the authors state inadmissible informality of its scientific and methodological basis. It was expressed in the lack of dialectics and logics as integral elements of cognition in the range of the forensic construction expert’s research tools. The work clearly demonstrates the possibility of direct application of dialectics laws and logics methods as the basis of solving practical tasks set by the investigator or the court to experts. Dialectics and logics are here represented as obligatory tools of the legal expert cognition process and defining objective circumstances of the criminal or civil case. This is the first time when high philosophical categories are integrated in the conceptual and categorical framework of the construction facilities researcher that was priory represented only by means of the technical language. According to the authors, such approach will provide structural improvement and intuitive completeness of the system of special construction and technical knowledge that are more and more needed by the modern court proceedings.

References

[1] Bacon, F. 2000. The New Organon (Novum Organum), In Jardine L. and Silverthorne M. (Eds.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[2] Belkin, R.S., and Belkin, A.R. 1997. Eksperiment v ugolovnom proizvodstve [Experiment in Criminal Procedure]. Moscow: Norma.
[3] Butyrin, A.Yu. 2014. Sudebnaya stroitelno-tehnicheskaya ekspertiza [Judicial Construction and Technical Enquiry]. Moscow: Moscow State Construction University.
[4] Butyrin, A.Yu., and Stativa, E.B. 2013. Zakony dialektiki – osnova metodicheskogo apparata sudebnogo eksperta-stroitelia i obiazatelny element programmy ego professionalnoy podgotovki [Laws of Dyalectics – Basics of Methodological Apparatus of Judicial Construction Expert and Compulsory Element of His Professional Training Program]. Theory and Practice of Forensic Enquiry. RFTsSE, 2 (30): 6-12.
[5] Butyrin, A.Yu. et al. 2012. Opredelenie technicheskoy vozmozhnosti I razrabotka variantov preobrazovaniya zhilogo doma kak elementa domovladeniya v sootvetstvii s usloviyami, zadannymi sudom: metod. Rekomendatsii dlia ekspertov [Defining Technical Possibility and Developing Options to Tranform Residential House as Element of House Ownership in Compliance with Conditions Specified by the Court: Method. Recommendations for Experts]. Collection of Methodological Recommendations on Judicial Construction and Technical Expertizes Procedure. Moscow: FBU RFTsSW at the Justice Ministry of Russia.
[6] Eisman, A.A. 1967. Zakluchenie eksperta (struktura i nauchnoe obosnovanie) [Expert’s Opinion (Structure and Scientific Stipulation)]. Moscow: Legal Literature.
[7] Engels, F., and Marx, F. 1961. Anti-Duhring [Anti-Duhring]. Moscow: Publishing house of political literature.
[8] Ivin, A.A. 2001. Logika. Elementarny kurs: uchebnoe posobie [Logics. Elementary Course: Mannual]. Moscow: Gardariki.
[9] Kondakov, N.I. 1975. Logicheskiy slovar-spravochnik [Logic Thesaurus]. Moscow: Science.
[10] Kuznetsov, K.T., Meluhin, S.T., and Georgiev, F.I. 1975. Dialekticheskiy materializm [Dialectic Materialism]. Moscow: Higher school.
[11] Metodika opredeleniya fizicheskogo iznosa grazhdanskih zdaniy [Methodology of Defining Physical Wear of Civil Constructions] of 27.10.1970 No. 404. RSFSR Ministry of Public Utilities.
[12] Mikeshina, L.A. 2005. Filosofiya nauki: Sovremennaya epistemologiya. Nauchnoe znanie v dinamike kultury. Metodologiya nauchnogo issledivaniya [Phylosophy of Science: Modern Epistomology. Scientific Knowledge in Dynamics of Culture. Methodology of Research]. Moscow: Progress-Tradition, MPSI, Flinta.
[13] Mill, J. S. 1843. System of Logic, Ratiocinative and Inductive: Being a Connected View of the Principles of Evidence and the Methods of Scientific Investigation (1). London: John W. Parker.
[14] Osnovy sudebnoy ekspertizy [Basics of Forensic Enquiry], 1997. Moscow: Russian Federal Center of Forensic Enquiry at Justuce Ministry of Russian.
[15] Shtark, I., and Vicht, B. 2004. Dolgovechnost betona [Concrete Longevity]. Kiev: Oranta.
[16] Sokolovskiy, Z.M., 1970. Ekspertnoe issledovanie prichinnoy sviazi po ugolovnym delam [Forensic Studies of Causal Relation in Criminal Cases]. Kiev: RIO Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Ukrainian SSR.
[17] Sokolovskiy, Z.M., and Cherepovskaya, T.N. 1962. Ispolzovanie obstoyatelstv dela dlia vydvizheniya ekspertnoy versii, vybora metodiki issledovaniya i postanovki ekspertnogo experiment [Using Circumstances of Case to Develop Expert Version, Select Research Methodology and Design Expert Experiment]. Expert Practice, 13: 27-34.
[18] Sokolovskiy, Z.M. 1968. Problema ispolzovaniya v ugolovnom sudoproizvodstve spetsialnyh znaniy dlia ustanovleniya prichinno-sledstvennoy sviazi yavleniy [Problem of Using Special Knowledge in Criminal Procedure to Determine Cause-and-effect Relations of Phenomena]. D.J.S. thesis, Kharkov Scientific - research institute of forensic examinations them . Honored . prof . NS Bokariusa, Kharkov.
[19] Strogovich, M.S. 1949. Logika [Logics]. Moscow: Politizdat.
[20] Voyshvillo, E.K., and Degtiariov, M.G. 2010. Logika [Logics]. Moscow: Humanitarian Publishing House VLADOS.
[21] Vickers, J., and Zalta, E. N. 2016. The Problem of Induction. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Available at: http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2016/entries/induction-problem/
Published
2016-12-12
How to Cite
BUTYRIN, Andrey Yurievich; STATIVA, Ekaterina Borisovna. Dialectics and Logics in Forensic Enquiry of Construction Facilities. Journal of Advanced Research in Law and Economics, [S.l.], v. 7, n. 5, p. 995–1003, dec. 2016. ISSN 2068-696X. Available at: <https://journals.aserspublishing.eu/jarle/article/view/520>. Date accessed: 14 apr. 2024.

Keywords

forensic construction and technical enquiry; methodological apparatus; conceptual and categorical framework; dialectics laws; logic methods; reasons of incidents of construction facilities