English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

The article attempts to establish the limits of applicability for distinguishing between types of rationality in legal activity on the basis of philosophical criteria. The authors revealed differences in thinking of a legal official, judge and, legislator, due to the peculiarities of their professional activities. Based on V. Stepina's classification of rationality types, the authors of the article try to prove that various specialties in the legal profession respectively require their representatives thinking at the level of classical, non-classical and post-non-classical rationality. Recognition of this distinction will allow substantiating the approaches to training lawyers, as well as explaining different views on the concept of

Limits to applicability of types of rationality in legal activities