'Tell All the Truth, but Tell it Slant': A Poetics of Truth and Reconciliation

There is a voice that tries to speak the truth. This essay will suggest that the discourse on the South African Truth and Reconciliation Commission [TRC] has perhaps ignored this most invisible of things, and has looked for the truth of the Commission everywhere except where it might be found, if indeed it can be found at all. To the extent that it is possible to oppose the truth of the voice to another truth, it may be useful to make use of a notion of poetics; even a sublime poetics.     

论诉讼真实的属性、标准及其认可

从认识论的角度而言,真实的属性、真实的标准和真实的认可是三个不同层次的问题,它们分别从主客体间性、主体性以及主体间性的角度揭示了真实的不同面目。诉讼真实也包含这三个方面的内容,忽略其中任何一个方面,都会导致混淆,学界的客观真实与法律真实之争正是由此而起的。真实的三个不同层面的问题说明,任何证明标准的设定都不能确保裁判者的主观认识必然符合客观事实真相,只有通过加强程序建设,才能使裁判者对案件事实的认定得到其他人的认可,并因此而具有权威性。     

Law, Morality, Coherence and Truth

Abstract . The author analyzes the relations between truth and law starting from the distinction between practical and theoretical spheres. He shows, first, how moral and legal statements and reasoning are connected with an operation of weighing and balancing different values and principles and how this operation is ultimately based on personal and intuitive preferences and feeling. The criteria developed by the theoretical sciences to define truth (coherence, consensus and pragmatic success) can only be translated into practical statements as criteria of correctness because we cannot affirm that a norm or value statement is true or false. The three criteria become interrelated indices of correctness: They are criteria for rational discourse.     

诉讼证明理论中的四组相对概念之辨正

法律事实是个既有歧义又不必要的概念。客观真实说作为关于证明标准的观点和关于证明评价标准的观点都是不成立的,不具有现实的程序意义,法律真实则是多余并且不成立的伪概念。诉讼证明中的所谓绝对真实与相对真实与认识论意义上的绝对真理与相对真理不可相提并论。对形式真实与实质真实应作为关于真实的发现的相对的程序原则来理解,形式真实主义的实质是承认当事人自身意志的有效性,实质真实主义的实质是不承认当事人自身意志的有效性。     

科学与法律领域的真相

审判过程并非仅仅是为了"查明真相"。自从美国的法律系统开始使用科学证人以来,法律领域就面临着混乱的局面。自从Frye规则到Daubert标准再到Kumho Tire标准,乃至发展为修改后的《联邦证据规则》702条,尽管法律系统经历了上述诸多努力,人们仍然不会相信法律系统能够从科学信息中获得预期的收益。科学主张和理论或真或假,它们的真或假是一个客观的问题。法律裁决可以断定法律真理为真,也可以断定"所谓的科学真理"为真。只有科学命题所描述的自然界现象和事件的性质——而非有关证据可靠性的法律裁决,也非法庭上的论证和交叉询问——能够证明真的科学命题为真,证明假的科学命题为假。     

对逻辑真几个问题的再检讨

本讨论了以下几个问题：（1）“逻辑真”是否是真的一个子类？（2）逻辑作为度量真的测度标准之一，它如何实现这种标准？（3）逻辑真自身的理论说明依赖于怎样的观念？作分析了以往哲学家、逻辑学家对这些问题的一些代表性看法，认为（1）“逻辑真”不是真的一个子类；（2）逻辑真只能测量观念形式上的关系；（3）逻辑真是认识论意义上的概念，它的本体论说明是一个“自足观念模式”的良性内循环结构。     

刑事证据制度与认识论——兼与误区论、法律真实论、相对真实论商榷

辩证唯物主义认识论是我国刑事证据制度的理论基础。文章反驳了否认认识论对证据制度起指导作用的“误区论”。认为刑事诉讼证明的目的是达到诉讼客观真实。客观真实是绝对真实与相对真实的统一。文章不赞同用法律真实或相对真实代替客观真实的观点 ,认为相对真实论的要害是不承认能够证实犯罪人是谁 ,这必然会导致错判。文章坚持我国法定的“犯罪事实清楚 ,证据确实充分”的排他性证明标准 ,不赞成采用英美的“排除合理怀疑”的证明标准 ,指出“排除合理怀疑”的哲学基础是经验主义。文章分析了设立刑事证据规则的目的、功能 ,认为其目的和功能是多元的 ,而发现客观事实是其首要目标 ,并指出 :认为认识论会导致刑讯逼供的观点是错误的。民事诉讼证明、行政诉讼证明不同于刑事诉讼证明 ,但也应当以认识论为指导。     

真理符合论在法律领域的困境及其超越

法律真理问题是法哲学中最根本的问题，其中尤以真理符合论在法律领域影响最大。真理符合论能为法律的有效性、法律权威提供比较令人信服的解释，但是，它同时也带来了一些问题。如何超越真理符合论面临的这些问题呢？诠释学真理观为我们提供了一种新的选择。从诠释学的观点看，法律真理是人的一种存在状态，是人展现自我、规划自我的一种方式，是人为实现自身本质而进行的一种制度安排。     

Factors that Facilitate and Undermine Children's Beliefs About Truth Telling

This study examined the extent to which children believe that truth telling is compromised by negative outcome expectancies. It also investigated the efficacy of two types of appeals, externally and internally directed, for encouraging truth telling. Seventy-two children from three age groups (5, 7, and 10 years of age) participated in a vignette study designed to examine these issues. Results showed that children believed that truth telling about an adult's transgression would be more likely if negative outcomes were not expected than if they were expected. Further, children believed that either externally or internally focused encouragement would facilitate truth telling when negative outcomes were expected for truth telling. Beliefs about the propensity for truth telling were associated more with positive evaluations of truth telling than with negative evaluations of lying. These results have important implications for court cases in which children testify about an adult who has sworn them to secrecy and they are afraid to speak the truth.     

证明标准研究中的模糊视阈

法律真实论与客观真实论的学术争议,使法学研究长期忽视的认识论受到关注。法律真实论从一开始就没有呈现出清晰的面貌,但它渲染的某些观点对司法者追求案件真相的内在动力产生了消解作用,这种消解作用主要是由它在能否发现客观真实和应否发现客观真实两大问题上提出的与客观真实论的不同见解产生的。     

对“法律真实”证明标准的质疑

无论是刑事实体法律规范还是刑事程序法律规范都不具有判定案件事实是否真实的功能。“法律真实”所陈述的基本内容与判定证据是否充分的标准重复 ,所以“法律真实”证明标准是不能成立的 ,“法律真实”这个概念是一个伪概念。“客观真实”标准是判定证据是否真实和是否充分的有机统一 ,对传统“客观真实说”作一些必要的限定之后 ,客观真实标准仍然是刑事诉讼证明的基本标准。     

On Logic in the Law: “Something,but not All”

Abstract. In 1880, when Oliver Wendell Holmes (later to be a Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court) criticized the “logical theology” of law articulated by Christopher Columbus Langdell (the first Dean of Harvard Law School), neither Holmes nor Langdell was aware of the revolution in logic that had begun, the year before, with Frege's Begriffsschrift. But there is an important element of truth in Holmes's insistence that a legal system cannot be adequately understood as a system of “axioms and corollaries”; and this element of truth is not obviated by the more powerful logical techniques that are now available.     

越过边境去立法——柏拉图《理想国》的一个注脚

在<理想国>描述的洞穴比喻中,隐含了哲人/真理为民众/意见立法的复杂关系.哲人/真理之所以要跨越本身的边界去为民众/意见立法,而不是隐匿自身、远离民众/意见,是由于民众/意见正是哲人/真理之得以成为哲人/真理的前提条件.哲人/真理必须进入民众/意见的世界,否则就根本不可能有关于哲人/真理的任何意义.哲人立的法就是要民众通过一定的规矩去发现自然正确,在朝圣的路途之中对于真正的思敞开大门,发现、显示自身的所是并揭示存在.法律正是民众"成人"的法门.     

Deaths and COVID-19: Talk,silence and alternative realities

This article critically considers the UK Government's insidious attempts to control the narrative around COVID-19 deaths through using the interrelated strategies of “talk and ‘silence’ in order to socially construct a definitive ‘truth’” around the virus. The article traces how these strategies worked in practice and the shift which took place from numerous press briefings and Parliamentary debates to an ominous silence around the number of deaths, in particular. At the same time, as the article illustrates, the government's truth has not prevailed. Their twin strategy has been contested and resisted by grassroots organizations and radical lawyers who have demanded that Ministers should take responsibility for the tens of thousands of preventable deaths which have occurred. Rather than government talk and silence prevailing, it is the voices of the haunted relatives of the dead, demanding accountability, which are creating an alternative narrative.     

Criteria-Based Content Analysis: An empirical test of its underlying processes

Abstract

Criteria-Based Content Analysis (CBCA) is a tool to assess the veracity of written statements, and is used as evidence in criminal courts in several countries in the world. CBCA scores are expected to be higher for truth tellers than for liars. The underlying assumption of CBCA is that (i) lying is cognitively more difficult than truth telling, and (ii) that liars are more concerned with the impression they make on others than truth tellers. However, these assumptions have not been tested to date. In the present experiment 80 participants (undergraduate students) lied or told the truth about an event. Afterwards, they completed a questionnaire measuring “cognitive load” and “tendency to control speech”. The interviews were transcribed and coded by trained CBCA raters. In agreement with CBCA assumptions, (i) truth tellers obtained higher scores than liars, (ii) liars experienced more cognitive load than truth tellers, and (iii) liars tried harder to control their speech. However, cognitive load and speech control were not correlated with CBCA scores in the predicted way.     

客观真实、法律真实辨析——在社会主义法治理念视野下

无论是追求客观真实,还是追求法律真实,其最终归宿都是为了及时有力地依法打击各种犯罪活动,有效维护社会治安秩序,保障国家、集体、人民群众的生命、财产安全。要在社会主义法治理念的指导下,正确把握好客观真实与法律真实的关系,最大限度地做到“法律效果与社会效果”的统一。     

Does the truth come out in the writing? Scan as a lie detection tool

We tested the accuracy of Scientific Content Analysis (SCAN), a verbal lie detection tool that is used world-wide by federal law enforcement and military agencies. Sixty-one participants were requested to write down the truth, an outright lie or a concealment lie about activities they had just completed. The statements were coded with SCAN and with another verbal lie detection tool, Reality Monitoring (RM). RM discriminated significantly between truth tellers and outright liars and between truth tellers and concealment liars, whereas SCAN did not discriminate between truth tellers and either kind of liar. Implications of the findings for the suitability of SCAN as a lie detection tool are discussed.     

论法律真理

一般人们认为,法律不是真理,法律与真理是分离的。但从历史的维度看,法律与真理分离的时间非常短暂。20世纪中叶之后,随着"事实与价值分离"观念的倒塌,"法律真理"这一观念不证自明起来。但何谓法律真理?是"符合论"意义上的,还是诠释学意义上的?由于"符合论"法律真理理论遇到了诸多难题,导致了法律真理的异化,因此,法律真理应是诠释学意义上的真理。法律真理是人的存在状态,是人展现自我、规划自我的一种方式,是人为实现自身本质而进行的一种制度安排。理解法律真理的路径在于法律实践。     

法庭之友:发现真实的扩展与限制

发现真实是诉讼的真谛。对抗制是英美法系发现案件真实的最佳选择,却也可能歪曲案件的真相。法庭之友有利于矫正对抗制的弊端,帮助法官发现案件真实,实现司法正义,已成为对抗制并蒂难分的重要组成部分。法庭之友极大地扩充了法官发现案件真实的制度空间,同时,法庭之友与特定的证据制度的结合又可能阻碍案件真实的发现。法庭之友就是在与真实发现的扩充与限制中发展与兴盛起来的。