How to distinguish between subjective and objective law in jurisprudence?

The difference between subjective law and objective law is whether or not an individual is given the right to claim. Subjective law gives the individual the right to make a claim, and the State must act or refrain from acting on the individual's request. Objective law, on the other hand, generally does not confer on individuals the right to make subjective claims, but only imposes a simple obligation of protection on the part of the State.

Subjective dialectics.

It is also known as "the dialectic of thinking" and "the dialectic of the mind". Refers to the laws of dialectical movement of the subjective world (thinking). That is, dialectical thinking, which is a reflection of the movement in the opposites that prevail everywhere in nature.

Objective dialectics is also known as "the dialectic of things". It refers to the laws of dialectical motion inherent in the objective world (nature and human society) itself. Its basic law is the law of unity of opposites.

The law of mutual change of quality, the law of negation of negation.

Objective dialectics governs the whole of nature.

Objective dialectics and subjective dialectics are essentially identical. The relationship between them is that objective dialectics is the root and basis of subjective dialectics and is primary;

Subjective dialectics is the reflection of objective dialectics in people's minds, and it is the second nature.

Target. Correctly grasping the relationship between subjective and objective dialectics, respecting objective laws, and striving to conform subjectivity to objectivity are important dialectical principles that should be followed in the process of understanding and transforming the world.

Subjective law and objective law are also subjective dialectics and objective dialectics, and simply put, subjective dialectics is a dialectic of people's theoretical form or thinking method form, which belongs to the category of consciousness.

Objective dialectics, on the other hand, is a dialectic that exists in the form of an objective state in which the movement of matter develops, and belongs to the category of matter as a whole, while subjective dialectics is a reflection of objective dialectics. Objective dialectics is content, subjective dialectics is form, and this is the relationship between the two.

Legal Analysis: The subjective aspect of crime refers to the psychological thoughts that the perpetrator has about the criminal act, such as intentionality, negligence, indifference, etc. Different subjective aspects may constitute different offences and may be subject to different penalties.

For example, if it is intentional, it will be convicted and sentenced in accordance with the provisions of the Criminal Law, if it is negligent, it will constitute a crime of negligence, and the punishment may be mitigated or mitigated according to the provisions, and if it is indifferent, it will be convicted and sentenced in accordance with the provisions of the Criminal Law. The objective aspect of the crime refers to the process by which the perpetrator commits the crime, that is, the manner and means by which the crime is committed. Corresponding to the circumstances of the crime.

The circumstances of the crime are an important reference basis for sentencing.

Legal basis: Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China

Article 14: Intentional crimes are committed intentionally where one clearly knows that one's conduct will have consequences that are harmful to society, and hopes or allows such consequences to occur, thus constituting a crime.

Those who commit intentional crimes shall bear criminal responsibility.

Article 15: Crimes of negligence are crimes where one should foresee that one's conduct might have consequences that endanger society, but did not foresee it because of negligence, or had foreseen it and was credulous enough to believe that it could have been avoided, resulting in such a result.

Only those who commit crimes of negligence shall be criminally liable if the law provides for them.

The objectivity of the law is the impartiality of the law. The so-called objectivity is to be able to truly reflect the current situation of society.

Certainty is what is written in a book and announced to the world.

The expression of the objectivity of the law needs to be guaranteed by certainty, and the certainty of the law needs the approval of the public to follow the objectivity of the law.

I dug it up and didn't get it, so I took a fancy to you.

It means that if there is a law, it may not be enforced to protect your rights; And it is only with power that the law can be enforced and enjoyed.

Summary. Western law is divided into subjective law (legal rights) and objective law (legal rules), and law specifically refers to specific legal rules formulated and promulgated by state organs, that is, positive law in the sense of national law.

Western law is divided into subjective law (legal rights) and objective law (legal rules), and law specifically refers to the specific legal rules formulated and promulgated by the state, that is, positive law in the sense of national law.

Objective law is considered to be the totality of all legal norms, and subjective rights are the collection of all the "privileges" enjoyed by the subject. The two are inextricably linked: objective law defines the scope of subjective rights and guarantees their implementation, while subjective rights themselves embody the purpose of objective law and ultimately achieve its purpose.

Thus, objective law and subjective rights are seen as "two sides of the same mirror of law."

What you said is wrong.