DOGMATISM AND ORTHODOXY ISSUES OF DOMESTIC FINANCIAL SCIENCE

. IThe article provides a critical analysis of conceptual framework inherited from Soviet financial science, which are not confirmed by the development of western economic science and modern practice. It is revealed that such orthodox dogmatic approach is based on the Marxist-Lenin doctrine, which testifies to the unrealized decommunization of domestic financial science.Methods. We use methods of abstraction and comparison, as well as methods of logical analysis.Results. The Unitarian view of finance, which combines public, corporate and personal finance into a single category and a common science, is criticized. It is stated that the divergence of scientific areas of private finance and public finance was carried out by Western economic thought at the beginning of the twentieth century. It is proved that the definition of the category “finance” through the concept of relations does not allow to fully reveal their essence. The limitations of the orthodox approach to determining the role of finance in the stages of social reproduction have been revealed, since it does not take into account the stages of production and consumption. The advantages of financial science of the West are pointed out as a result of a comprehensive study of social production of goods, redistribution of income, fiscal exchange and public consumption. The need to change the paradigm of the view on financial issues from state-centric to human-centric is emphasized. A critical appraisal of the orthodox interpretation of public finance functions is given. The functions of public finance are highlighted: allocation of resources to the public sector and income redistribution.Conclusions. There is a necessity of further revise the orthodox conceptual framework and use the methodological framework of the Western financial thought.