Correlation of Legal Reasoning and Legal Thinking

The article proposes to scientific discourse the issue of understanding the relationship of juridical (legal) reasoning with legal thinking, identifying the place and role of reasoning in legal thinking. The complexity of the topic of knowledge does not make it possible to draw peremptory conclusions and formulate paradigm answers. At the same time, the article made an attempt to show the external and internal sides of legal thinking, the connection of the theory of argumentation with elements of the mechanism of legal thinking and its most significant functions. It is emphasized that along with the already studied aspects of legal thinking, attention should be paid to the internal-semantic connection of the theory of argumentation with legal analytics and the reflective component in the legal consciousness within the framework of thinking. It is emphasized that the information-speech model of the world inherent in the subject, associated with predicting the variability of possible solutions, has an influencing potential for the formation of legal thinking. The representation of a legally relevant situation through projection in legal thinking allows the construction of supposed situational decisions based on selected reasoning. From the perspective of problematization of the research issue, it is assumed that the system of legal argumentation has the property of emergence. Legal argumentation is not a set or combination of elements that make up it, but arising in it of such new properties that are the result of connections that strengthen the persuasive effect and the onset of one of the predicted target options for a legal solution. The author concluded that legal argumentation depends on the goals, situational context and value attitudes of the subjects involved in the settlement of legal interaction in solving a problematic legal situation. In order to understand the essential properties of legal thinking in the future, one should pay attention to the fact that the grounds of persuasiveness of legal argumentation can act as factors of the formation of trust (distrust) in the right to the field of coherence of rational, intuitive and value grounds.