The article deals with the problems caused by certain aspects of differences and the mutual influence of law and multiculturalism, since the law of the state has to take into account the tendencies, including in the cultural autonomy and globalization of modern society.The main idea of legal multiculturalism is the assertion that if there is no holistic, one-of-a-kind culture for all societies, which can be defined by a definite, indivisible, ideal value system with some hierarchical structure, any cultural society must own its own rule of law and be guided solely by it. It has been found that whichever model of multiculturalism the country does not take as a basis, its basic principle in practice, in the state policy is the principle of cultural freedom, that is, giving individuals the right to live according to their choice, with a real opportunity to evaluate other options. Therefore, changes in the “political field” inevitably lead not only to changes in legislation, but also to ideas about the right of the general mass of the population and legal practices
1. Halyndo F. Kulturnaia sreda y poniatye prava[Cultural environment and the concept of law]/
Aleksandrov A. Y., Kuznetsov Э. V. Vыzov zakonu XXI veka. Sbornyk nauchnыkh statei. Moskva: Hranytsы, 1998.
360 p.2.Hranat N. L., Popov V. Y. Razlychnыe podkhodы k ponymanyiu prava y ykh praktycheskoe znachenye
[Different approaches to understanding the law and their practical significance]. Sledovatel. 2011. № 4. P. 54–
58.3.Drozhzhyna S. V. Kulturna polityka suchasnoi polikulturnoi Ukrainy: sotsialno-filosofskyi ta pravovyi
aspekty [Cultural policy of modern multicultural Ukraine: socio-philosophical and legal aspects]. Donetsk:
DonDUET, 2005. 196 p.4. Zandkiuler Kh. Y. Demokratyia, vseobshchnost prava y realnыi pliuralyzm [Democracy,
universality of law and real pluralism]. Voprosы fylosofyy. 1992. № 2.P. 35–50. 5. Kondratev V. P. Metafyzycheskyi
podkhod v prave (opыt obosnovanyia). Chelovek v sotsyalnom myre [Metaphysical approach in law (experience of
substantiation). Man in the social world]. Nauchno-praktycheskyi vestnyk. 2010. Vыp. 3–4. P.2–30.6. Borradory
D. Amerykanskyi fylosof: Besedы s Kuainom, Dэvydsonom, Patnэmon, Nozykom, Danto, Rorty, Keivlom,
Makyntairom, Kunom [American philosopher: Conversations with Quine, Davidson, Putnamon, Nozick, Danto,
Rorty, Cave, McIntyre, Kuhn]. Per. s anhl. Moskva: Dom yntellektualnoi knyhy, Hnozys, 1999. 200 p.7. Turen
A. Vozvrashchenye cheloveka deistvuiushcheho. Ocherk sotsyolohyy [The return of the actor. Essay on sociology].
Moskva: Nauchnыi myr, 1998. 204 p.8. Trubetskoi E. N. Trudы po fylosofyy prava [Works on the philosophy of
law]. SPb.: Yzdatelstvo RKhHY, 2001. 543 p. 9. Kheffe O. Polytyka, pravo, spravedlyvost. Osnovopolozhenyia
krytycheskoi fylosofyy prava y hosudarstva [Politics, law, justice. Fundamentals of the critical philosophy of law and
the state]. Perevod V. S. Malakhova pry uchastyy E. V. Malakhovoi. Moskva: Hnozys, 1994. 319 p.10. Chukyn
S. H. Pliuralyzm, solydarnost, spravedlyvost. K probleme ydentychnosty fylosofsko-pravovoho dyskursa v sytuatsyy
postmoderna [Pluralism, solidarity, justice. On the problem of the identity of philosophical and legal discourse in the
postmodern situation.]. SPb., 2000. 323 p.