Normativity in legal sphere is considered mainly in two aspects, which are sometimes called "legal normativity"and" normativevity of law". These aspects are normativity as a General nature of prescription and normativity as a trend or even a regularity. Analysis of the possibility of mutual communication and mutual deducibility of normativity through reducing them to information leads to two problems. The first one is the "principle of Hume" who does not allow to deduce prescriptions from descriptions. The second one is an inapplicability of the Leibniz’s old Modalism in legal studies. Because of these circumstances, it seems logically incorrect to speak in semantic aspect about mutual relation or mutual deducibility of normativity as a general requirement and normativity as a characteristic of mass behavior in the social system. The analysis of the structure of these concepts makes it obvious that both the sence and the meaning of these concepts are completely different. Thus, it is wrong to say that one of these concepts is wider or narrower than the other. It is not correct to say of "different aspects" of one phenomenon (norm). The concept of "norm "in two versions of its definition has as common only the name (sign) - "norm". This phenomenon is sometimes found in natural languages and is called homonymy.
norm of law, normativity of law, legal normativity, legal prescription, aspects of normativity
1. Lipatov E. G. Normativnost' pravovyh yavleniy avtoref. dis. … kand. yurid. nauk. Saratov: Saratov. gos. akademiya prava, 1996. 26 s.
2. Kelsen H. Pure Theory of Law. Berkeley and Los Angeles, 1967. 356 p.
3. Blohin Yu. V. Kriterii otgranicheniya normativno-pravovyh predpisaniy ot nenormativnyh v sovetskom zakonodatel'stve: na primere netipichnyh predpisaniy: avtoref. dis. … kand. yurid. nauk. M., 1991. 26 s.
4. Davydova M. L. Normativno-pravovoe predpisanie kak nachal'nyy uroven' pravovoy normativnosti // Konfliktologiya. 2011. № 4. S. 100-108.
5. Plahov V. D. Social'nye normy. Filosofskie osnovaniya obschey teorii. M.: Mysl', 1985. 255 s.
6. Kudryavcev V. N. Pravovoe povedenie: norma i patologiya. M.: Nauka, 1982. 287 s.
7. Byuler K. Teoriya yazyka: Reprezentativnaya funkciya yazyka / per. s nem., obsch. red. T. V. Bulyginoy. 2-e izd. M.: Progress, 2001. 502 s.
8. Ivin A. A. Osnovaniya logiki ocenok M.: Izd-vo Mosk. un-ta, 1970. 230 s.
9. Popov V. V. Problemy teorii prav cheloveka: informacionnaya priroda prav cheloveka // Vestnik Volgogradskoy akademii MVD Rossii. 2014. № 1. S. 14-20.
10. Popov V. V. O svyazi prav cheloveka so svobodoy: nekotorye logicheskie problemy // Vestnik Volgogradskoy akademii MVD Rossii. 2014. № 2 (29). S. 9-16.
11. Gerloh A., Knapp V. Logika v pravovom soznanii / pod red. A. B. Vengerova. M.: Progress, 1987.
12. Popov V. V. K voprosu o strukture pravovoy normy // Vestnik Volgogradskoy akademii MVD Rossii. 2016. № 1. S. 10-15.
13. Popov V. V. Sankciya pravovoy normy: mif ili real'nost'? // Vestnik Volgogradskoy akademii MVD Rossii. 2016. № 2. S. 154-158.
14. Vrigt G. X. fon. Logiko-filosofskie issledovaniya: izbrannye trudy. M.: Progress, 1986. 600 s.
