About Legal Philosophy

In this article I will take into hand the ideas, which contain the principal political and ethical requirements of our time, which require the special attention of the jurists. To summarize these requirements I will use the term “humanitarianism”. I am aware of the fact that some shades of meaning of this notion do not reflect that what I have in my mind. Therefore, I will not attempt to give a strict definition of humanitarianism as I understand it. A more precise definition will be left for the moment, when the ideas embraced by this definition will have obtained more precise contours. For the first draft of concept I will observe at the beginning that the notion of humanitarianism is strictly linked to the notion of reason. It means that in all cases, when a man today and in future is concerned, we have to establish a philosophical disposition carefully, according to our best understanding, under the stimulating guidance of conscience, responsibility and all-embracing care. At the same time this responsibility means the denial of every “intellectual immolation”, false compassion, sanctimonious devotion and false amicability. (This is a shortened article from the original.)     

The Nature of Legal Philosophy

Abstract. Philosophy is general and systematic reflection about what there is, what ought to be done or is good, and how knowledge about both is possible. Legal philosophy raises these questions with respect to the law. In so doing, legal philosophy is engaged in reasoning about the nature of law. The arguments addressed to the question of the nature of law revolve around three problems. The first problem addresses the question: In what kinds of entities does the law consist, and how are these entities connected such that they form the overarching entity we call “law”? The answer is that law consists of norms as meaning contents which form a normative system. The second problem addresses the question of how norms as meaning contents are connected with the real world. This connection can be grasped by means of the concepts of authoritative issuance and social efficacy. The latter includes the concept of coercion or force. The third problem addresses the correctness or legitimacy of law, and, by this, the relationship between law and morality. To ask about the nature of law is to ask about necessary relations between the concepts of normative meaning, authoritative issuance as well as social efficacy, and correctness of content.     

What Is Legal Philosophy?

Abstract.  This paper argues that legal philosophy is a social practice undertaken by participants whose views have primacy over non-participants. This social practice is dynamic, constructive and based on understanding and explanation, in order to meet normative expectations. Legal Philosophy should include Legal Ontology, Legal Epistemology and a Theory of Justice. It is usually claimed that legal philosophy is a branch of a genus called philosophy, but there is no one single definition of it. In this paper it is argued that as a starting point there is a need to choose between three basic traditions in philosophy.     

法理学与法哲学的关系

对于法理学与法哲学的关系,我国学术界大致上可以分为“法哲学独立论”和“法哲学即法理学”两大系列观点。法理学与法哲学都是研究法律一般理论的学科,但由于支配它们的哲学思维有差异,因而使得它们的研究模式有了差别。正是这种研究模式的差别导致了法理学与法哲学之间存在着区别。但不能因为这些区别便可以否定“法哲学即法理学”这种观点,而且这些区别的存在只应被看成是划分法理学或法哲学中不同流派或分支的一个根据。     

重视法理学学习,提高法律综合素养

法理学是以整个法律现象的共同性问题及其规律为研究对象的学科。法律专业学生在学好部门法的同时,要强化其法理学方面的知识、理念,使之成为合格的与法治国家相适应的法律工作者。     

The Philosophy of Scandinavian Legal Realism

Abstract.  The jurisprudential movement known as Scandinavian Legal Realism was founded by the Swedish philosopher Axel Hägerström and the Danish philosopher and jurist Alf Ross in order to destroy the distorting influence of metaphysics upon legal thinking and to provide the secure philosophical foundation for scientific knowledge of the law. I shall present Hägerström's philosophical theory and argue that he is committed to the metaphysical view that the world in time and space consists of causal regularities between things and events devoid of any values that is related to his epistemological view that what there is can be known by experience. Hägerström's philosophy advances a naturalistic approach that conceives the positive law as a system of rules in terms of behavioural regularities among human beings and legal knowledge as an empirical inquiry into the causal relations between legal rules and human behaviour. This approach is followed by his pupils, the Swedish lawyers A. V. Lundstedt and Karl Olivecrona, whereas Ross appeals to logical positivism. The naturalistic approach should be taken seriously since it leaves no room for the normativity of the law and for legal knowledge in terms of reasons for belief and action.     

Metamorphosis in Hans Kelsen's Legal Philosophy

Two major questions stem from the fundamental shift in Hans Kelsen's legal philosophy that takes place in 1960 and the years thereafter: first, the scope of the shift and, second, its explanation. On the first question, I argue that the shift is not limited to Kelsen's rejection of the applicability of logic to legal norms. Rather, it reaches to his rejection of the entire Kantian edifice of his earlier work. On the second question, I argue that the explanation for the shift has a conceptual dimension as well as a historico‐biographical dimension. That is, I argue that Kelsen's rejection of the principle of non‐contradiction vis‐à‐vis legal norms reaches to the Kantian edifice in that the principle was presupposed in Kelsen's earlier work and appears, expressis verbis, in his ‘Kantian filter’. And I argue that certain historico‐biographical data are germane, including, quite possibly, the earlier revolution in Kelsen's thought, that of 1939–40.     

孔子法哲学的三个维度

“正名”是孔子法哲学的本体论维度,“时中”是孔子法哲学的方法论维度,“人本”是孔子法哲学的价值论维度,而前两者是从属于后者的,“以人为本”的孔子法哲学是以“仁”为核心的孔子哲学思想的必然逻辑落脚点。     

经济审判机制的法哲学辨析

在法哲学的视界下 ,“经济审判庭的撤销”既是一个具体的法律事象 ,又是一种亟待考察的法意识。对此二者的“反思” ,有待我们直接深入观照现实的社会化的法律生活世界 ,同时给予“撤销”这一文本以解释学的诠释 ,由此获得对“撤销”事象思维与存在关系的体认。通过这样的理路 ,建构融时代性与民族性于一体的经济审判机制方才显出其必要与可能。     

当代法哲学视域下的墨家法律观

当代法哲学视域下,墨家法律观首先在事实性的有效性向度上,认定和证成了法律的文本性、符号性、行动性、规则性、规范性、普遍性以及强制性等事实性的张力;其次,在法律有效性的规范性向度上,墨家以法为天,认定法源自于天,法是天的根本意志的体现,而天的意志的实质乃是——具有正义、平等、实践三个显著特点的——兼爱利民;其三,在交往理性的向度上,墨家把法的产生和生成、法的有效性及其实现,置于"从事"、"说书"尤其是"谈辩"的世界里,提出了语用谈辩的交往法律观:把法的有效性标准及其检验看作是,透过"古者圣王"、"百姓耳目"、"百姓人民"中的谈辩——即经过多主体的交往理性,而达成的"中效"或"共识"。墨家的交往法律观主张通过多主体之间的平等"谈辩",来化解"事实性"与"规范性"之间的紧张关系,从而实现"兴天下之利"的良性互动。     

语言哲学与法律语言规范化研究

作为从对世界的本体认识转向对语言本身认识的语言哲学,在语言和世界的关系之宏观层面的认识论上,在理想语言设计之中观层面的方法论上,其对法律语言规范化研究具有无可替代的重大意义.特别是其语言意义的理论和学说,在微观层面的操作上,可以直接指导法律语言规范化对具体语言问题的研究.不过,中外任何学科的学者之所以没有探讨过语言哲学和法律语言之问的关系,主要应该归因于这个课题的复杂性和跨越性.     

A Treatise of Legal Philosophy and General Jurisprudence

Abstract. “The Notebook Corner,” edited by Enrico Pattaro, makes its first appearance here as a new section of Ratio Juris. This new section can be described in a sense as an offshoot of the project for A Treatise of Legal Philosophy and General Jurisprudence, a work still in progress composed of five theoretical volumes and six historical ones. The theoretical volumes receive a brief presentation in the paper immediately below, with a specific focus on Volume 1, entitled The Law and the Right: A Reappraisal of the Reality That Ought to Be. This volume is then discussed as well by Rosaria Conte and Cristiano Castelfronchi in the second paper of this “Notebook Corner”.     

新康德主义法学三论

新康德主义是康德哲学中伦理主义与形式主义的产物.而新康德主义法学,则是以继承和发展康德的法哲学为特征的欧洲西方法学流派,是新康德主义的社会哲学在法律领域中的应用.从新康德主义法学形成、发展和主要观点中,我们可以从某一侧面把握现代西方法哲学的历史演变与理论线索,对中国的法律现代化和法理学的发展,也有一定的学术意义.     

An Autobiographical Aperqu of Legal Philosophy*

Abstract. In his autobiographical sketch, the author surveys sixty years of legal philosophy. He traces the major changes that have come about in the philosophy of law in the wake of the Second World War, and the gap which has been bridged between Continental and Anglo-Saxon theories. The values of liberal democracy and the acknowledgement of human rights have helped to circumvent the gulf between natural law theories and legal positivist theories.     

区际法律冲突的法哲学思考

区际法律冲突是指在一个主权国家内部不同法律制度之间的冲突。发生区际法律冲突的原因从根本上来说是不同群体的利益所致。从本质上讲,区际法律冲突是法律的利益和正义价值的冲突。中国是一个存在着区际法律冲突的典型国家。构建中国解决区际法律冲突的有效途径在理论诉求上需要坚持主权完整和"一国两制"的基本原则、立法层面上平衡各法域的不同利益和国家的整体利益,司法层面上则注重司法实践的实质正义。     

“以人为本”的法哲学解读“以人为本”四人谈

刘旺洪(主持人)：各位老师、各位同学，非常高兴在这个“五一”长假期间有幸请到了我国四位著名的法学家，他们是——中国法学会副会长、中国法理学会副会长、博士生导师、吉林大学党委书记张文显教授；中国法学会常务理事、中国法理学会副会长、博士生导师、浙江大学法学院院长李龙教授；中国法律史学会副会长、博士生导师、中国人民大学法学院吕世伦教授；中国法理学会副会长、博士生导师、江苏省高级人民法院院长公丕祥教授。今天，四位著名法学家共同给我们开设一个四人谈，主题是“‘以人为本’的法哲学解读”。下面请四位专家用现代法哲学的理念和方法来解读“以人为本”的命题。     

《老子》法哲学中的“常”与“名”

《老子》法哲学的基础建立在其关于"常"的理论上。"常"是"道"的表现,虽可为人所认知、并作为自然法规制社会,然其本质终属于抽象性的规律。在《老子》的法哲学中,"常"未能转化为"法"的逻辑原因在于对"名"的功能阐述上,而矛盾根源则为战国时期对价值观问题之反思。由于"名"理论之演进发生分歧,遂出现了庄子、黄老、法家三派的法律观之理论区别,其共同的思维模式则为中国法律传统所继承。     

论法哲学与司法实践的关系——兼论司法推理的"哲学模式"

哲学应和法律拉开距离,法哲学只是一个从外在的视角帮助法律人加深对法律和司法过程的理解的东西。在一个运行良好的民主体制下,优秀法官的裁判应该是从中立性的原则出发,做出一种合乎理性的裁判,这种裁判既非哲学的也非科学的,而是真正的法律的。法官应该从"哲学王"的诱惑之下走出来,加入促进和监督民主的进程之中。