Max Weber on the Labour Contract: Between Realism and Formal Legal Thought

Although Max Weber's review essay of the first part of Philipp Lotmar's The Labour Contract may appear peripheral to his overall contribution to legal sociology, it contains important insights on the relationship of law to economics, the utility of sociological empirical research for jurisprudence, the epistemological gap between 'legal dogmatics' and the sociology of law, and the fundamental distinction between state and non-state law in properly understanding the developmental logic of labour law.
In the review, far from appearing as a rigid partisan of positivistic legal formalism, Weber admits of a kind of 'legal pluralism' as a necessary path to the sociology of law, and allows some measure of realism, when celebrating Lotmar's analysis of the social facts of law as a precondition for proper juristic treatment of the labour contract. Nevertheless, Weber remained distrustful of legal realism which, for him, was founded on an epistemological confusion between 'is' and 'ought'.     

法理论:历史形成、学科属性及其中国化

要破除部门法学因过度教义化形成的学科壁垒,不能走向要求法学无条件地向其他社会科学全面开放的极端,而应该深化和发展法理论研究。通过历史的梳理可以发现,科学范式的转换、传统法哲学的衰落和部门法学的内在诉求构成了法理论研究形成的背景。它发端于历史法学时期,以19世纪的法学百科全书运动为其先声,而其作为独立的法学分支学科则经历了创始、成熟和多样化三个阶段,从一开始的分析法理论逐渐发展为包括多种进路在内的宽泛领域。法理论是一门从内部观察者的视角出发,通过研究基本法律概念来致力于法律知识的一般化与体系化的关于实在法的规范学科,包括法的理论与法律科学理论两部分。它对部门法学发挥着体系构造、学说批判和知识筛选功能,构成部门法学之知识和方法的法理。当下中国的法理论研究,要在兼容并蓄的基础上与部门法学形成良性互动,提升研究的整体自洽性和一般性,加强分析法理论和社会法理论方法间的分工与合作。     

法理学的定义与意义

法理学是一个运用哲学方法研究法律基本问题的学术门类 ,与法律哲学或法哲学含义相同 ,都是探讨法律的一般性问题的学科。与其他法学门类相比较 ,法理学的对象超越了实在法规范 ,甚至更多地以相关法律思想和学说为研究的直接对象 ,从中获得思考现实法律问题的精神养料 ,目的是建构和探索法律的理论问题。因此 ,法理学的意义主要在于开启心智、启蒙思想 ,提高法律职业者的理论思维能力。     

“部门法哲学”还是“部门法理学”？

部门法理学是法理学与部门法学间的交叉学科，不是哲学与法学间的交叉学科，部门法哲学更像法理学而不是法哲学。这两个名称的选择不存在对或者错，而是妥当与否的问题。     

论诸法学流派对法律方法的理论支援

法律方法理论不仅受规范法学理论的制约和支持,而且也受其他法学流派的制约和支持。不同法学流派所支持的具体法律方法不尽相同。如价值法学之于价值衡量、社会法学之于事实替代、规范法学之于效力识别、经济分析法学之于利益衡量、多元论法学之于法律续造等,都更容易产生支持效果。尽管不同法学流派各自支持不同的法律方法,但这不否定某一法律方法受多个法学流派理论支援的情形,也不否定一个法学流派可以支持多种法律方法的情形。     

法理即法律原理之解说

自清末民初以来,将法理解说为法律原理就成为法学界的通例,但其界定方式则有四种:一是径直以法律原理定位法理;二是将法律原理、法律原则并列来定位法理;三是将法理视为由法律原理推导出的法律一般原则;四是认为法理是指法律原则,但包括法律原理在内。法理和法律原理的存在是一种客观的必然:世上的万事万物都应有其存在和运行的原理,法律自然也不例外;法律作为人类的伟大创造,自身即蕴含着追求正义等法律价值的法理;法律的价值观念虽因时代、地区的不同而会有所差异,但其中的基础法理却不受时空影响;对法律的分析和研究舍法理之外别无他途。立足于已有的研究成果,可将法理界定为"在综合各种法律现象的基础上,由学者所抽象并为社会所认同的有关法律基础、法律根据、法律判准、法律渊源的基础性、普遍性原理"。同时,法理与自然规律、社会价值、内存于法典和单行法律中的法律原则以及事理、情理等存在明显的差异,不可混淆。     

论哲学化的法理学

法理学名称经历了从部门哲学、法哲学、法律哲学、法理学到哲学的法理学的演变过程;法理学学术问题有描述性问题、规范性问题和哲学问题三种基本类型;研究法的哲学问题的法理学实际上就是法的世界观的学问,具有人的实践基础上的科学性和价值性的特征;在当今时代研究法理学哲学问题的最好途径和最好方法是对历史中的法理学进行理解和解释。     

Hart's Jurisprodence: Its relation to Philosophy

The essay concerns the way jurisprudence adapts to the challanges set by contemporary philosophy concentarting upon the case of Hart"s legal theory. Hart produced one paradigm of linking philosphical considerations to jurisprudential analyses. He seemed to believe that the investigation of legal phenomena must itself raise and answer the underlying philosophical questions (only occasionally relying on philosophical sources). Although Hart was well aware of the rising new philosophy of his time, he sought to elaborate an autonomus conceptual framework for philosophical jurisprudence. The essay often takes Wittgenstein as an example for elucaidating Hart"s relation to philosophy (although critizing those who believe that Hart"s is a key figure in the jurisprudential reception of Wittgenstein"s later philosophy). The essayjustifies Hart"s claim to gain theoretical autonomy but points to three mistakes in that prespect. (1) He sometimes misconcieved his philodophical sources owing to the fact that he refrained from analyzing them. (2) Hart justified some of his crucial claims by a combination of arguments that is not entirely consistent. (3) His standpoint often raised philosophical issues but sometimes failed to make an identifiable point upon them. The essay concludes that Hart was right in thinking that the time had come to reconsider the conditions of making theories about law but he couild not justify his assumption that the reconsideration would lead to certain kind of comprehensive theory of law.     

法律起源的进化生物学解释

法律起源研究是观察和探讨一切现代法律现象的前提,是法理学的基础问题之一。不同法学流派以及哲学、人类学、社会学或心理学等学科都对这一问题提出了不同的解释,但至今无法取得基本共识。如果仍然局限于传统研究范式,其研究取得重大进展的可能性已经不大。生物进化既包括有机体进化,也包括文化进化,二者均为进化生物学的研究对象。法律是一种文化现象,而文化现象至少1400万年前就已在生物界中出现并进化至今,因此法律必定脱胎于文化进化史的某个阶段,这就为在法律起源问题研究中引入进化生物学范式提供了可能。     

论功能主义思想之于西方法社会学发展的影响

作为法学与社会学两个学科结合的产物,西方法社会学在建立和发展的过程中,深受西方社会学理论流派与方法论思想的影响,功能主义思想就是对西方法社会学影响较深的一例,它分别从以下几个方面推动了西方法社会学的发展:第一,功能主义思想的引入改变了传统法学研究中注重分析法律结构内在的逻辑一致性的思维惯习,提供了从法律与外部世界的关系来考察法律的"外部"视角;第二,功能主义思想提供了从法律与社会整体的联系来考察法律问题的系统的视角;第三,功能主义思想中对"功能"内涵更为全面的阐释丰富了法社会学中的法律功能研究。     

More Reasons Why Jurisprudence Is Not Legal Philosophy

It is generally assumed, without argument, that legal theory, legal philosophy, philosophy of law, and jurisprudence all mean the same thing. This paper rejects that assumption, and in particular the assumption that jurisprudence is the same thing as legal philosophy. This assumption has recently been challenged by Roger Cotterrell in his article “Why Jurisprudence Is Not Legal Philosophy,” and I seek to build on his arguments by adding insights found in the work of Stanley Fish.     

中国近代“法理学”、“法律哲学”名词考述

在中国,"法理"古已有之。但"法理学"、"法律哲学"名词则自域外传入,并为中国法学家所广泛认知与界定。总体而言,不仅存在着"法理学"与"法律哲学"概念的错混,而且在实质上,"法理学"理论的发展,比"法律哲学"更见成效。     

The people v. the principle of legality in the People's Republic of China

The history of the People's Republic of China (PRC) since 1949 makes it apparent that the principle of legality is ideological anathema to the Party leadership there. In Western jurisprudence, in anthropology of law and in the nascent field of sociology of law, the development of the principle of legality has consistently been seen as a necessary foundation for the positive evolution of any legal system. The use of law in China in the recent past raises fundamental questions about this premise. The Chinese experience suggests a new hypothesis as to legal development for laboratory and field testing. This article will review the Chinese experience and formulate that hypothesis.     

Law in Culture

Abstract. The relationship of law and culture has long been a concern of legal anthropology and sociology of law. But it is recognised today as a central issue in many different kinds of juristic inquiries. All these recent invocations of the concept of culture indicate or imply problems at the boundaries of established thought about either the nature of law or the values that law is thought to express or reflect. The consequence is that legal theory must, it seems, now systematically take account of the notion of culture. The present paper asks how this might best be done. I argue that a concept of culture, as such, is of limited utility for legal theory because the term “culture” embraces a too indefinite and disparate range of phenomena. But legal theory needs conceptual resources to consider at a general level the relations of law and culture. This paper suggests that these resources should include, above all, a rigorous distinguishing of different abstract types of community. Legal theory requires a sociologically‐informed concept of community. What is encompassed by the vague idea of culture is actually the content of different types of social relations of community and the networks (combinations) in which they exist.     

法教义学观念的源流

从历史上看,教义学观念首先起源于古希腊医学,随后古希腊哲学和古罗马的"规则法学"继受了相关观点并予以创新。法教义学经中世纪注释法学与人文主义法学奠定雏形,并由理性自然法学说提供方法论基础。源流时期的法教义学观念保持了大体一致:在基本观念上,法教义被认为是用以表述法律的一般性规则或命题,具有权威性;在方法论上,法教义学被认为是公理演绎方法(几何学方法)构造出的概念-命题体系。这使得作为知识形态之法教义学有别于研究型思维、决疑术和论题学。澄清这一源流可以为当下的法教义学研究提供更为扎实的"历史的向度"。     

约翰·奥斯丁法哲学再探

约翰·奥斯丁是现代西方法理学中的重要人物,分析法学的创始人,以提出"法律命令说"而著名,他的法哲学长期以来一直受到人们的批判,这些批判主要来自于两大阵营:一是形形色色的自然法学家;另一是一些后起的法律实证主义者。这些批判影响巨大,以致遮蔽了奥斯丁法哲学的本来面目。其实,"法律命令说"并非奥斯丁法哲学的核心与标志,纵使人们批驳倒了"法律命令说",对奥斯丁的法哲学整体来说损害也并不大。奥斯丁的代表性思想是:倡导对法律进行分析性研究,主张建构起一般法理学与法律教义学,最终使法学成为一门科学。在众多的批判之下,奥斯丁的上述代表性思想不仅没有失去生命力,反而保持着旺盛的生命力,以致在现代西方法理学中,奥斯丁仍然是一个人们无法绕过的思想家。     

Islamo-Arabic Culture and Women’s Law: An Introduction to the Sociology of Women’s Law in Islam

The present paper addresses the mutual relationship between society and law in shaping women’s law in Islam from the perspective of the sociology of law. It analyzes the role of pre-Islamic social, political, and economic structures in the Arabian Peninsula in modeling women’s law and highlights some customary laws which were rejected or revived and integrated in Islamic jurisprudence. In this regard, the paper reviews issues such as polygyny, rights to inheritance, marriage, the process of testimony and acceptable forms of evidence in legal matters, diyya (blood money), the exclusion of women from the judiciary and the system of issuing fatwa (legal opinion), natural right of guardianship (wilāya) of underage children after divorce, and regulations related to the veil. Finally, referring to the manner of the Prophet of Islam, the paper suggests that ?urf (custom) can be considered as a source of Islamic legislation alongside other commonly known sources of fiqh (Islamic jurisprudence).     

法人与行政主体理论的再探讨——以公法人概念为重点

公法人和私法人的区分是大陆法系对法人的基本分类,具有重要的理论和实践意义。我国应当重新塑造行政主体理论,特别应当采用公法人概念。在法人一般理论上,则应当修正法人的一般定义,并且在将来的民法典中以更加合理的方式规定公法人问题。国家机关不应当具有法人和行政主体地位,国家才是法人和行政主体。     

传统法律思想研究的近现代嬗变

在中国法律思想史学科一百多年的发展历程中，以人物为中心的研究体例为学科发展和法律思想的传承奠定了良好的基础，后来逐渐转向以问题研究为中心、以法理阐释为目的的研究方式，并衍生出法律思想史的国学、法哲学、部门法和法文化等研究维度。作为本民族文化传统的一部分，继往开来的传统法律思想研究应该在构建“中国”语境下的现代法学图景过程中产生更大的价值。     

From Public Sociology to Public Philosophy: Lessons for Law and Society

The late Philip Selznick's final book, A Humanist Science, examines the role of values and ideals in the social sciences, including the study of law and society. Throughout his academic career, Selznick was committed to what he called “legal naturalism,” a sociological version of the natural-law perspective, while his critics continue to adhere to various forms of positivism. But the age-old opposition between natural law and legal positivism today may be giving way to the quest for public sociology—a sociology that promotes public reflection on significant social issues and thus functions as a moral and political force. A Humanist Science ends with a strong plea for public philosophy. Public philosophy overlaps with public sociology but is a much stronger concept. Selznick's message of public philosophy may be another of his enduring contributions to the field of law and society.