I have no idea whether this term has been used by someone. If not, then I use it!
I have my theory of law exam in three weeks and now I am doing my best to try to put all that abstract what is law what is rule of law back to mind, well-structured and well-organised. There is one exam question about legal culture and what is it. It is how we view the world and the role of law and legal regulation there. According to the classification, I am supposed to have so called professional legal culture - formed mostly thanks to the professional knowledge of law, but not daily experiences.
Yesterday I was participating in skype session with my colleagues. The agenda was on creating non-profit organisation. And there I felt that even though I know Finnish, I looked through Yhdistyslaki and official websites of competent organs, but my non-professional legal culture which developed through my daily experiences as a usual citizen and employee in the sphere of academic work, not law still dominates. The issue is that running non-profit organisation even with zero financial balance is more demanding than in Finland which makes me sceptical about registering non-profit organisation even in Finland. The student of law part of me convinces me that to overcome the differences in legal culture of two neighboring cultures I need to read the legislation, but the part of me as a person queing to submit meaningless paper form reports in Petrozavodsk prevails. In this transitive period I feel that my emotions influence my objective legal evaluation. It is quite difficult and ineffective to bear multiple legal perceptions and cultures at the same time.
Definitely, perception of law and legal culture issues are something so complex and abstract. If my master degree were in philosophy of law, I would make a case study about that. As it is not, I feel the need to make my professional part of legal culture dominant:)
.jpg)
I have my theory of law exam in three weeks and now I am doing my best to try to put all that abstract what is law what is rule of law back to mind, well-structured and well-organised. There is one exam question about legal culture and what is it. It is how we view the world and the role of law and legal regulation there. According to the classification, I am supposed to have so called professional legal culture - formed mostly thanks to the professional knowledge of law, but not daily experiences.
Yesterday I was participating in skype session with my colleagues. The agenda was on creating non-profit organisation. And there I felt that even though I know Finnish, I looked through Yhdistyslaki and official websites of competent organs, but my non-professional legal culture which developed through my daily experiences as a usual citizen and employee in the sphere of academic work, not law still dominates. The issue is that running non-profit organisation even with zero financial balance is more demanding than in Finland which makes me sceptical about registering non-profit organisation even in Finland. The student of law part of me convinces me that to overcome the differences in legal culture of two neighboring cultures I need to read the legislation, but the part of me as a person queing to submit meaningless paper form reports in Petrozavodsk prevails. In this transitive period I feel that my emotions influence my objective legal evaluation. It is quite difficult and ineffective to bear multiple legal perceptions and cultures at the same time.
Definitely, perception of law and legal culture issues are something so complex and abstract. If my master degree were in philosophy of law, I would make a case study about that. As it is not, I feel the need to make my professional part of legal culture dominant:)
.jpg)
No comments:
Post a Comment