The article examines the concept and content of the natural limits of positive law. It is emphasized that society uses natural norms that are evolutionarily created. The state in rule-making may take them into account or not, although they are attributes of positive law, determine the upper and lower limits of existence and action. Failure to take into account social and legal norms in lawmaking leads to the destruction of the natural boundaries of positive law, the leveling of the value properties of law, which is formed by the state. The most effective limits are set by mental law as the greatest determinant of natural law, tested by the age of society. In addition to the known mental (natural) attributes (integral properties of the object), positive law includes the stability of law and the degree of content of natural norms in positive law. The established mentality in law is partially changing. The existing principle of timeliness indicates the change of outdated norms and the prevention of possible precedence of possible new norms. To do this, take into account the historical heritage of the nation. The problem for establishing the limits of existence and effect of national law is European law, which may contradict national customary law. In this case, the state must "listen" to the legal norms of its own civil society Positive law is dominated by variability of boundaries, which is sometimes indisputable and even contradicts the positive law established in the state. These changes are objective and subjective. The reasons for objective changes do not depend on the will of man, in particular the legislator, but stem from the real needs of society: natural or man-made influences, wars, revolutions, catastrophes, and so on. The reasons for subjective change include the will of leaders who do not take into account the views of members of society, real circumstances, and other factors.
1.Husariev S. D., Oliinyk A. Yu., Sliusarenko O. L. (2008). Teoriia prava i derzhavy: navch. posib. Kyiv: Vseukr. asots. vydavtsiv «Pravova yednist». 270 p.
2.Koval I. M. (2018). Epifaniia prava: mentalni vyznachennia u terminakh ta sententsiiakh: navch. posib. Lviv: Liha-Pres. 156 p.
3.Makarenko L. O. (2012). Pryntsyp verkhovenstva prava: problemy rozuminniata dii. Derzhava i pravo. № 58. P. 9–18.
4.Petrushenko V. L. (2011). Filosofskyi slovnyk: terminy, personalii, sententsii. Lviv: «Mahnoliia 2006». 352 p.
5.Porivnialne pravoznavstvo: pidruch. dlia stud. yur. spets. vyshch. navch. zakl. / za red. V. Tkachenka. (2003). Kharkiv: Pravo. 274 p.
6.Skakun O. F. (2001). Teoriia derzhavy i prava: pidruchnyk / per. z ros. Kharkiv: Konsum. 656 p.
7.Slyvka S. S. (2015). Problemy filosofii prava: navch. posib. Vyd. 2, pererobl.i dopov. Kharkiv: Pravo. 192 p.
8.Slyvka S. S. (2012). Filosofiia prava: navch. posib. Kyiv: Atika, 256 p.
9.Suchasnyi tlumachnyi slovnyk ukrainskoi movy: 60 000 sliv / za zah. red. prof. V. V. Dubichynskoho (2007). Kharkiv: Shkola. 832 p.